QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


A  STUDY  OF  QUESTIONED 
DOCUMENTS  WITH  AN 
OUTLINE  OF  METHODS  BY 
WHICH  THE  FACTS  MAY  BE 
DISCOVERED  AND  SHOWN 


r> 


BY 


ALBERT    S.    OSBORN 

EXAMINER  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


WITH   AN   INTRODUCTION 

BY 

PROFESSOR    JOHN    H.    WIGMORE 

AUTHOR  OF 

"WIGMORE  ON  EVIDENCE" 


TWO  HUNDRED  ILLUSTRATIONS 


OF  TV- 

:TY 

OF 

£ALIFC  ROCHESTER,  N.  Y. 

THE  LAWYERS'  CO-OPERATIVE  PUBLISHING  CO. 


1910 


3. 


s? 


Vlll  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ing  is  invented,  and  education  in  writing  becomes 
gradually  almost  universal.  Amidst  these  new  condi- 
tions, the  falsifier  again  outstrips  society  for  a  while. 
A  Chatterton  and  a  Junius  can  baffle  the  community. 
Well  down  into  the  1800s,  the  most  daring  impositions 
remain  possible.  But  society  at  last  seems  to  have  over- 
taken the  falsifier  once  more.  Science  and  art,  in  the 
mass,  are  more  than  a  match  for  the  isolated  individual 
We  have  now  apparently  entered  further  upon  a  some- 
what variant  documentary  epoch,— that  of  the  type- 
writing machine.  But  even  this,  with  its  novel  possibili- 
ties, will  remain  within  the  protective  control  of  science, 
—as  the  present  book  shows. 

The  feature  of  Mr.  Osborn's  book  which  will  perhaps 
mark  its  most  progressive  aspect  is  its  insistence  upon 
the  reasons  for  an  opinion, — not  the  bare  opinion  alone. 
If  there  is  in  truth  a  science  (and  not  merely  an  individ- 
ual empiricism) ,  that  science  must  be  based  on  reasons, 
and  these  reasons  must  be  capable  of  being  stated  and 
appreciated.  Throughout  this  book  may  be  seen  the 
spirit  of  candid  reasoning  and  firm  insistence  on  the  use 
of  it.  I  believe  that  this  is  the  spirit  of  the  future  for 
the  judicial  attitude  towards  experts  in  documents.  Tf 
judges  and  lawyers  can  thoroughly  grasp  the  author's 
faith  in  the  value  of  explicit,  rational  data  for  expert 
opinions,  the  whole  atmosphere  of  such  inquiries  will 
become  more  healthy.  The  status  of  the  expert  will  be 


INTRODUCTION  IX 

properly  strengthened,  and  the  processes  of  a  trial  will 
be  needfully  improved. 

The  book  abounds  in  the  fascination  of  solved  mys- 
teries and  celebrated  cases.  And  it  introduces  us  to  the 
world-wide  abundance  of  learning  in  this  field,  French 
and  German  investigations  are  amply  drawn  upon. 
Psychology,  mathematics,  and  literature,  as  well  as 
chemistry,  photography,  and  microscopy,  are  made  to 
serve.  The  reader  arises  with  a  profound  respect  for 
the  dignity  of  the  science  and  the  multifarious  dexterity 

of  the  art. 

JOHN  H.  WTGMORE. 

Northwestern  University 
Law  School,  June  1,  1910. 


IN  the  words  of  Epicharmus,  which  are  the  motto 
of  this  work,  "Mind  sees,  and  Mind  hears;  all 
things  else  are  deaf  and  blind."  It  is  not 
merely  by  looking  at  a  plant,  or  a  mineral,  or  an 
animal,  that  any  one  really  sees  it.  This  is  true  of 
all  the  productions  of  nature,  and  it  is  equally  true 
of  whatever  is  elevating,  or  beautiful,  or  graceful, 
or  minute,  in  the  works  of  man.  It  is  true  of  a 
cathedral,  a  statue,  or  a  picture,  of  Grecian  vases  or 
of  ancient  coins.  It  is  likewise  true  of  handwriting. 
— Hon.  Edward  Twistleton,  in  Handwriting  of 
Junius,  p.  Ixxv  (1871). 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Introduction                      .                   .                   .  .            vii 

Contents                    ....  xi 

Preface            .                   .                   .                   .  .             xv 

Author's  Introduction  xix 


CHAPTER  I. 

Care  of  Questioned  Documents  .  .  1 

CHAPTER  II. 

Classes  of  Questioned  Documents  .  .  6 

CHAPTER  III. 
Standards  of  Comparison         .  .  .  16 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Photography  and  Questioned  Documents         .  .  36 

CHAPTER  V. 

The  Microscope  and  Questioned  Documents  .  70 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Instruments  and  Appliances  .  .  .89 

CHAPTER  VII. 
Movements,  Line  Quality,  and  Alignment  in  Writing  105 


Xll  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Pen  Position,  Pen  Pressure,  and  Shading         .  .126 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Arrangement,   Size,   Proportions,  Spacing,  and  Slant  in 

Writing  .  .  .  141 

CHAPTER  X. 

Writing  Instruments       .  .  .  .154 

CHAPTER  XL 

Systems  of  Writing  and  Questioned  Documents       .  1 68 

CHAPTER  XII. 
Variation  in  Genuine  Writing         .  .  .196 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
Individual  and  General  Characteristics  in  Writing  206 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

Variety  of  Forms  in  Handwriting  and  Mathematical  Cal- 
culations Applied  to  Questioned  Handwriting     .          217 

CHAPTER  XV. 

Simulated  and  Copied  Forgeries  .  236 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

Traced  Forgeries  .  .  .  266 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

Anonymous  and  Disputed  Letters  .  .  302 


CONTENTS  Xlll 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

Ink  and  Questioned  Documents       .  .  .          330 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

Paper  and  Questioned  Documents  .  .  363 

CHAPTER  XX. 

Sequence  of  Writing  as  Shown  by  Crossed  Strokes  .          375 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

Writing  over  Folds  in  Paper       .  .  .  394 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

Erasures  and  Alterations  in  Documents  .  .          404 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 
Questioned  Additions  and  Interlineations 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

Age  of  Documents          ....          431 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

Questioned  Typewriting  437 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

A  Questioned  Document  Case  in  Court  .                             466 

Appendix                 .                   .  •                   479 

Bibliography                     .                   .  •          483 

Index  489 


THE  late  Mr.  Justice  Miller  of  the  United  States 
Supreme  Court  declared  that  the  difficulties 
in  determining  questions  of  fact  are  greater 
and  more  common  than  those  that  occur  in  deter- 
mining  questions   of  law,    and   other  judges   have 
testified   to   the    same   experience.      It   is   therefore 
eminently  desirable  that  aid  should  be  sought  by 
the    triers   of  fact   in   all   accessible   sources   where 
authentic  advice  is  likely  to  be  found. — Moore  on 
Facts,  Vol.  /,  p.  v,  1908. 


PREFACE 

THE  purpose  of  this  book  is  to  assist  in  the  dis- 
covery and  proof  of  the  facts  in  any  investiga- 
tion or  legal  inquiry  involving  the  genuineness 
of  a  document. 

Definite  methods  of  procedure  are  given  for  investiga- 
tion of  the  many  important  questions  relating  to  the 
various  kinds  of  questioned  documents  and  the  attempt 
has  been  made  to  reduce  to  order  the  known  facts  and 
underlying  principles  of  the  various  branches  of  the  sub- 
ject. It  has  been  the  aim  to  make  as  brief  as  possible  if 
not  wholly  to  avoid  those  abstruse  discussions,  particular- 
ly of  unsettled  questions,  which  so  often  render  technical 
treatises  of  little  practical  value. 

The  work  contains  the  proved  results  of  the  latest 
investigations  and  it  is  confidently  thought  will  furnish 
some  suggestions  and  render  some  immediate  assistance 
to  one  having  an  actual  case  in  hand.  Nothing  of  im- 
portance connected  with  the  various  questions  has  been 
purposely  omitted,  but  that  which  is  not  likely  to  be  of 
actual  use  has  been  given  no  place. 

The  book  has  been  in  course  of  preparation  for  a 
number  of  years  and  a  large  part  of  it  has  grown  out  of 
actual  cases  involving  the  questions  discussed  and  has 
been  tested  and  amended  by  application  to  many  such 
cases. 

Illustrations  have  been  introduced  where  it  is  thought 
they  are  really  helpful  and  make  clearer  the  points  under 
consideration,  but  merely  curious  illustrations  of  general 

[XV] 


FTS 


interest  as  well  as  long  discussions  of  noted  cases  have 
been  purposely  omitted.  Although  there  is  much  gen- 
eral interest  in  many  of  the  subjects  treated  the  work 
is  not  primarily  intended  for  the  popular  reader,  but  is 
designed  as  a  working  treatise. 

Definite  instructions  regarding  the  investigation  of 
the  several  classes  of  questioned  documents  are  given; 
the  chapters  on  photography  and  the  use  of  the  micro- 
scope outline  specific  methods  and  give  practical  direc- 
tions that  in  any  case  can  at  once  be  put  in  operation; 
the  chapter  on  typewriting  as  evidence  is  the  result  of 
study,  experience  and  investigation  in  this  important 
new  field;  the  method  outlined  for  the  measuring  and 
recording  of  ink  tints  makes  it  possible  in  many  cases 
to  present  conclusive  testimony  on  the  subject  of  the  age 
of  writing,  and  the  special  application  of  stereoscopic 
photography  to  the  subject  of  questioned  documents 
makes  it  possible  to  present  delicate  and  almost  hidden 
facts  in  a  most  conclusive  manner. 

Some  of  the  various  topics  treated  are  necessarily 
very  closely  related  and  some  slight  repetitions  have 
been  permitted  to  remain  in  order  that  the  separate 
chapters  may  furnish  more  available  assistance  by  be- 
ing more  complete  in  themselves.  The  exhaustive  index 
with  cross-references  will  be  helpful  to  one  who  is  in- 
vestigating some  special  phase  of  the  various  subjects 
treated. 

A  number  of  dated  legal  references,  with  brief  ex- 
cerpts from  opinions,  will  be  found  in  connection  with 
various  discussions  throughout  the  work.  While  these 
references  to  the  law  are  from  the  most  authoritative 
sources,  they  are  not  printed  primarily  for  the  purpose 


PREFACE  XV11 

of  giving  the  law,  but  because  of  their  bearing  on  the 
discussion  of  the  merits  of  the  particular  subjects  to 
which  they  refer. 

The  many  excellent  digests  and  text-books  now  avail- 
able give  the  law  of  questioned  documents  according  to 
the  latest  decisions  in  the  various  states,  and  this  book 
is  designed  not  to  give  the  law  on  the  subject  but  to 
assist  in  that  most  important  part  of  the  trial  of  a  case, 
the  proving  of  the  facts. 

It  is  of  course  essential  to  know  the  law,  but  it  is 
certainly  true  that  many  lawyers  are  inclined  to  spend 
much  time  looking  up  old  legal  opinions  that  may  have 
only  the  remotest  connection  with  the  proof  of  a  case  in 
court  and  neglect  to  qualify  themselves  on  the  most 
fundamental  and  elementary  questions  connected  with 
the  actual  facts  they  must  prove. 

It  is  astonishing  how  often  and  in  how  many  ways 
questions  regarding  handwriting  and  allied  subjects 
enter  into  trials  of  issues  in  courts  of  law  and  it  is  hoped 
that  what  is  here  presented  may  in  such  inquiries  assist 
in  furthering  the  ends  of  justice. 

The  book  is  especially  designed  for  the  use  of  the 
lawyer,  but,  it  is  thought,  will  also  be  useful  to  the  banker, 
the  business  man,  or  to  any  one  who  may  be  called  upon 
to  investigate  the  genuineness  of  a  document. 

ALBERT  S.  OSBORN. 

New  York, 

April  5,  1910. 


UPON  principle,  therefore,  as  well  as  from 
the  necessity  of  the  case,  proof  of  hand- 
writing, under  proper  restrictions,  is,  as 
has  been  seen,  everywhere  admitted.     Moreover, 
as  has  been  well  said,  it  seems  that  this  kind  of 
evidence,  like  all  other  probable  evidence,  admits 
of  every   degree   of   certainty,    from   the   lowest 
presumption   to   the   Highest    moral   certainty.— 
American    and  English  Encyclopaedia    ()f  Law, 
Vol.  XV,  2d  Ed.,  p. 


AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

GENUINE  documents  are  sometimes  suspected 
and  attacked  and  no  doubt  are  occasionally  set 
aside  as  fraudulent,  while  on  the  other  hand 
great  numbers  of  fraudulent  documents  undoubtedly 
wholly  escape  suspicion  and  pass  as  genuine.  A  sus- 
pected document  in  the  natural  course  of  events  sooner 
or  later  gets  into  the  hands  of  a  lawyer  or,  as  frequently 
occurs,  he  may  be  the  one  who  first  suspects  it  as  he  is 
usually  the  first  to  pass  judgment  upon  it.  He  must 
consider  the  question  and  end  the  inquiry  or  decide  upon 
a  more  extended  investigation. 

If  the  interests  of  justice  are  to  be  fully  served  the 
lawyer  at  this  point  should  know,  at  least  in  a  general 
way,  what  initial  steps  to  take  in  order  to  test  the 
genuineness  of  the  instrument.  He  should  know  what 
to  look  for  and  how  to  look  at  it  and  should  know  what 
can  be  shown  and  how  to  show  it ;  and  a  portion  of  this 
preliminary  work  he  should  be  able  to  do  himself  and  do 
promptly. 

Questions  of  this  character  and  of  the  greatest  im- 
portance may  arise  in  the  midst  of  a  trial  when  a  prompt 
decision  is  imperative  and  immediate  knowledge  is  doub- 
ly valuable.  Some  one  has  said  that  every  man  should 
know  enough  law  to  know  when  he  ought  to  consult  a 
lawyer,  and  it  is  equally  true  that  a  lawyer  should  know 
at  least  enough  of  the  study  of  questioned  documents 
to  be  able  to  determine  with  promptness  and  certainty 
how  far  such  a  subject  of  inquiry  should  be  carried. 

[xix] 


XX  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  lawyer  should  have  this  special  knowledge  in 
order  also  that  he  may  be  able  to  utilize  effectively  testi- 
mony on  the  subject  that  he  may  wish  to  present;  that 
he  may  be  qualified  to  test  in  advance  the  force  and 
truth  of  such  testimony,  and,  finally  and  most  important 
of  all,  that  he  may  be  prepared  to  cross-examine  adverse 
witnesses  with  intelligence  and  skill. 

A  case  is  always  in  grave  danger  if  an  attorney  is  try- 
ing by  the  aid  of  witnesses  to  get  before  a  jury  that 
which  he  himself  does  not  clearly  understand.  Such  a 
lawyer  will  often  prejudice  his  cause  in  the  mind  of  the 
court,  annoy  and  disconcert  his  own  witnesses,  confuse 
the  jury  and  lose  his  case  because  he  proves  too  little, 
or,  what  may  be  far  worse,  attempts  to  prove  too  much. 

The  successful  lawyer  is  he  who  not  only  knows  the 
law  but  knows  the  facts,  and  when  he  is  able  to  quote 
the  first  and  prove  the  second  he  is  ready  for  trial.  A 
jury  instinctively  distrusts  a  lawyer  who  does  not  seem 
to  understand  clearly  the  facts  of  his  own  case. 

The  vast  increase  in  the  use  of  documents  is  one  of 
the  characteristics  of  modern  civilization,  and  as  all  such 
documents  are  subject  to  forgery,  spurious  papers  are 
constantly  being  produced  ranging  in  importance  from 
one  dollar  orders  to  one  hundred  thousand  dollar  notes ; 
from  five  dollar  checks  to  five  million  dollar  wills. 

It  would  be  well  if  there  could  be  devised  a  better 
method  of  safeguarding  and  transferring  important 
property  interests  than  by  the  almost  exclusive  use  of 
written  documents,  but  no  immediate  change  seems 
probable.  In  many  instances  the  disposition  of  millions 
of  dollars  depends  upon  the  correct  identification  of  a 
single  signature.  This  great  opportunity  is  a  temptation 


AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION  xxi 


that  it  seems  impossible  for  some  to  resist  who  would 
not  commit  an  ordinary  crime. 

In  these  days  the  estates  of  deceased  persons  are  the 
especial  prey  of  bold  adventurers,  and  nearly  every  term 
of  court  has  forgery  cases  of  high  or  low  degree.  The 
proportion  of  this  class  of  crime  has  undoubtedly  greatly 
increased  in  recent  years. 

Forgeries  vary  in  perfection  all  the  way  from  the 
clumsy  effort  which  any  one  can  see  is  spurious,  up  to  the 
finished  work  of  the  adept  which  no  one  can  detect.  The 
perfect  forgery  would  naturally  be  successful,  and  might 
not  even  be  suspected,  but  experience  shows  that  the 
work  of  the  forger  is  not  usually  well  done  and  in  many 
cases  is  very  clumsy  indeed. 

A  number  of  causes  lead  to  this  result,  the  chief  of 
which  is  that  fortunately  the  one  who  produces  a  criminal 
forgery  is  rarely  the  skillful  one  qualified  to  do  it  well, 
and  also  because  a  crime  of  any  kind  is  an  unnatural  and 
unusual  act.  Forgers  frequently  do  not  exercise  what 
would  seem  to  be  ordinary  precaution,  but  no  doubt 
overlook  one  part  of  the  process  because  such  intense 
attention  is  given  to  other  parts,  and  it  is  probably  true 
that  they  are  sometimes  more  bold  because  in  so  many 
cases  ineffective  procedure  and  inadequate  means  have 
been  provided  for  the  detection  and  proof  of  forgery. 

In  numerous  states,  even  at  this  late  day,  the  common- 
sense  practice  of  admitting  genuine  writings  expressly 
for  the  purpose  of  comparison  with  a  questioned  writ- 
ing is  not  allowed.  In  such  jurisdictions  only  writings 
"in  the  case  for  other  purposes"  can  ordinarily  be  used, 
a  limitation  which  makes  the  proof  of  forgery  difficult, 
ties  the  hands  of  those  who  seek  to  show  the  facts, 


XXII 


QUESTIONED   DOCUMENTS 


encourages  crime  and  assists  the  criminal.  The  United 
States  Federal  Courts  still  follow  this  antiquated  rule 
in  criminal  cases. 

This  procedure  is  a  curious  inheritance  projected  into 
the  present  day  practice  and  its  continuance  is  one  of 
the  curiosities  and  misfortunes  of  legal  procedure.  In 
these  jurisdictions  where  no  standards  are  admitted  wrrit- 
ing  in  many  cases  must  be  proved  by  those  alone  who 
are  said  "to  know  a  handwriting,"  and  the  spectacle  is 
too  often  presented  of  one  line  of  tottering  old  men  and 
women,  who  saw  some  one  write  many  years  before,  all 
testifying  that  they  think  a  certain  writing  is  genuine 
and  another  similar  line  testifying  that  from  their  recol- 
lection it  is  not  genuine.  Such  witnesses  many  times 
may  not  be  able  to  see  well  enough  to  get  the  papers 
right  side  up  and  such  "proof"  is  often  a  veritable  farce. 

It  would  certainly  be  better  to  put  in  evidence  a 
sufficient  number  of  good  standards  of  writing  and,  with 
even  a  fairly  intelligent  jury,  have  no  testimony  what- 
ever but  let  the  jury  examine  for  themselves,  rather 
than  depend  upon  such  "recollection"  testimony  alone. 
It  is  possible  "to  know  a  handwriting,"  but  such  a 
knowledge  is  not  gained  by  inexperienced  observers  by 
a  mere  casual  glance  at  a  writing  seen,  it  may  be,  many 
years  before.  To  say  that  such  a  person  knows  a  hand- 
writing is  a  ridiculous  legal  fiction. 

Expert  testimony,  on  any  subject,  that  is  merely  the 
statement  of  an  opinion  may  be  of  but  little  value  and 
often  is  not  worth  the  time  that  it  consumes  in  a  court 
of  law.  But  in  proportion  as  such  ^testimony  is  clear  and 
logical  and  of  a  nature  that  permits  it  to  be  illustrated 
in  a  tangible  manner  it  becomes  valuable.  A  mere 


AUTHOR  S  INTRODUCTION  XX111 

opinion  any  one  can  give,  but  an  opinion  based  on  ac- 
curate and  intimate  knowledge,  if  logically  presented 
and  adequately  illustrated,  will  not  only  bear  the  fierce 
light  that  beats  upon  the  witness-box  but  will  be  clari- 
fied and  strengthened  the  more  it  is  attacked. 

In  an  inquiry  relating  to  a  document  attention  is 
directed  to  a  material,  visible  thing,  and,  with  proper 
and  adequate  standards,  methods  of  procedure  are  pos- 
sible that  cannot  be  employed  in  many  investigations  in 
which  expert  testimony  is  necessary. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  duty  of  the  competent  and 
honest  expert  in  such  cases  is  first,  by  applying  to  the 
question  his  special  knowledge  and  his  experience  in 
similar  cases,  to  determine  what  is  the  fact  in  the  matter 
at  issue.  Then  methods  must  be  devised  and  means  em- 
ployed whereby  the  fact  can  best  be  shown  and  proven 
so  that  an  impartial  and  competent  observer  will  reach  a 
correct  conclusion. 

The  real  expert,  who  is  in  fact  what  the  word  implies, 
when  guided  and  assisted  by  the  competent  lawyer,  will 
make  the  facts  themselves  testify  and  stand  as  silent 
but  convincing  witnesses  pointing  the  way  to  truth  and 
justice.  In  order  that  this  end  may  be  obtained  with 
certainty  the  lawyer  as  well  as  the  witness  should  master 
the  subject. 

In  connection  with  the  discussion  of  the  methods  of 
investigation  of  the  various  questions  attention  has 
specifically  been  called  to  the  limitations  of  technical 
ability.  It  is  disagreeable  but  necessary  to  keep  in  mind 
the  ignorant  pretender  and  the  conscienceless  perjurer 
who,  in  partnership  with  the  attorney  who  engages  and 
pays  them,  bring  so  much  discredit  upon  the  administra- 


XXIV 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


tion  of  the  law  as  applied  to  scientific  inquiries.  No 
other  remedy  is  so  effective  against  this  evil  as  thorough 
technical  knowledge  of  the  subjects  discussed.  While  it 
may  never  be  possible  to  label  and  bar  out  the  unworthy, 
it  is  hoped  that  a  way  may  be  found  for  the  courts 
officially  to  recognize  those  who  are  qualified  and  worthy 
and  thus  render  more  effective  their  assistance  in  discov- 
ering and  proving  the  facts. 

In  a  legal  controversy  regarding  a  questioned  docu- 
ment the  contention  of  one  party  must  be  right  and  the 
other  wrong;  there  can  be  no  middle  ground.  The  one 
purpose  of  this  book  is  to  assist,  as  in  a  scientific  inquiry, 
in  discovering  and  proving  the  fact.  Not  a  line  has  pur- 
posely been  included  in  these  pages  to  give  aid  and  com- 
fort to  those  on  the  wrong  side  whose  interests  impel 
them  to  attempt  to  prevent  the  truth  from  being  dis- 
covered and  shown  in  a  court  of  law. 

It  is  hoped  that  the  book  will,  at  least  in  some  slight 
degree,  assist  in  bringing  about  an  improvement  in  the 
methods  of  using  expert  testimony  regarding  docu- 
ments that  will  make  it  easier  in  every  possible  way  to 
find  and  prove  the  fact  in  all  courts  of  all  states. 


JC 

UNIVLRSITY 

OF 


CHAPTER  I. 

CARE  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

From  the  moment  that  the  genuineness  of  a  docu- 
ment is  questioned  it  should  be  handled  and  cared  for  in 
such  manner  as  not  to  impair  in  the  slightest  degree  its 
value  as  evidence.  This  precaution  may  seem  unneces- 
sary, but  it  frequently  happens  that  through  careless- 
ness or  ignorance  the  evidential  value  of  a  document  of 
great  importance  is  seriously  impaired  and  important 
interests  are  thus  imperiled.  As  early  as  practicable  the 
exact  physical  condition  of  every  part  of  a  suspected 
document  should  be  carefully  observed  in  detail  and 
made  a  matter  of  definite,  written  record  and  thereafter 
the  document  should  be  preserved  as  far  as  possible  in 
exactly  the  condition  it  is  in  when  first  suspected.  It  is 
usually  of  especial  interest  to  one  of  the  parties  to  insist 
that  the  document  be  properly  protected  and  cared  for. 

Numerous  negative  directions  are  necessary.  Such  a 
document  should  not  be  cut,  torn  nor  mutilated  in  any 
manner  in  the  slightest  degree ;  it  should  not  be  touched 
with  an  eraser  of  any  kind  nor  with  pen,  pencil  or  sharp 
instrument  of  any  character.  It  should  not  be  folded  in 
any  new  place;  should  not  be  folded  and  unfolded  un- 
necessarily; should  not  be  wet  nor  dampened  and,  ex- 
cept by  special  permission,  no  chemicals  should  be  placed 
upon  papers  of  the  opposing  party  in  such  a  way  as  to 
injure  or  deface  them  and  such  tests  should  be  made 
only  by  those  properly  qualified.  To  avoid  even  the 

[i] 


2  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

possibility  of  pencil  marks  being  made  upon  such  a 
document  those  examining  it  should  not  be  allowed  to 
point  closely  at  letters  or  any  parts  of  it  with  a  pencil. 
Sharp  pointed  dividers  or  measuring  instruments  should 
riot  be  put  upon  a  questioned  writing  except  with  the 
greatest  care  and  only  by  those  skilled  in  the  use  of 
such  instruments  and  a  tracing  should  not  be  made  of 
it  except  under  proper  supervision  and  with  a  very  soft 
pencil  and  the  very  lightest  pressure. 

A  folded  document  of  any  kind  that  is  being  investi- 
gated, such  as  a  note,  check,  draft,  legal  paper  or  letter, 
should  be  unfolded  and  kept  flat  in  a  suitable  envelope 
or  receptacle  made  of  heavy  paper.  This  should  be  done 
in  order  to  avoid  the  necessity  of  folding  and  unfolding 
the  document  every  time  it  is  examined,  which  procedure 
will  inevitably  break  the  paper  at  the  folds  and  also 
change  the  condition  of  the  folds  as  shown  when  the 
genuineness  of  the  paper  is  first  questioned. 

Small  disputed  documents,  such  as  checks,  notes  and 
similar  papers,  should  be  kept  unfolded  in  suitable  en- 
velopes as  stated,  and  it  is  an  excellent  plan  to  place 
them  between  the  two  leaves  of  a  folded  sheet  of  stiff 
blank  paper,  cut  a  trifle  larger  when  folded  than  the 
documents,  so  that  they  can  be  held  in  this  folded  sheet 
and  not  directly  in  the  hand  or  between  the  thumb  and 
finger  as  such  papers  are  usually  held.  Such  papers  if 
held  and  handled  in  the  ordinary  way  will  inevitably  be- 
come soiled,  defaced  and  covered  with  finger  marks. 

If  the  document  is  of  a  fragile  character,  and  especial- 
ly if  it  is  to  be  handled  by  attorneys,  witnesses,  court  and 
jury  in  a  protracted  trial,  it  is  highly  important  that  in 
every  case  it  be  placed  between  two  pieces  of  clear  glass, 


CARE  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


3 


cut  slightly  larger  than  the  document  and  fastened  to- 
gether with  binding  tape  at  one  end  and  a  rubber  band 
placed  around  the  opposite  end.  This  method  permits 
examination  of  both  sides  of  the  paper  and  if  thus  pro- 
tected a  document  will  not  be  injured  by  any  amount  of 
handling.  The  paper  can  easily  be  removed  when  neces- 
sary by  simply  removing  the  band  at  one  end  of  the  glass 
covers.  In  order  to  reduce  the  weight  and  bulk  of  the 


A 


FIG.  1 — Double  Glass  Document  Covers 

exhibits  where  there  are  numerous  disputed  documents 
it  may  be  better  to  use  transparent  celluloid  with  card 
backing  instead  of  the  glass,  and  if  there  is  no  writing 
on  the  back  of  the  sheet  one  glass  cover  attached  to  a 
stiff  card  of  the  same  size  as  the  glass  will  be  sufficient. 
A  questioned  document  should  not  be  exposed  to 
moisture  of  any  kind;  should  not  be  exposed  long  to 
strong  sunlight  or  left  out  in  the  air  uncovered,  and 
should  not  be  carried  in  the  pocket  where  it  may  be  af- 
fected by  bodily  moisture  or  become  worn,  wrinkled  or 
soiled. 


4  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

In  examining  a  questioned  document  with  a  micro- 
scope having  no  stage,  but  a  special  foot  that  allows  the 
instrument  to  be  placed  anywhere  on  the  paper,  special 
care  should  be  taken  not  to  soil,  wrinkle  or  fold  the  docu- 
ment. To  avoid  the  necessity  of  placing  the  microscope 
directly  upon  the  document  itself  it  is  an  excellent  plan 
to  place  over  the  document  during  the  examination  a 
good  strong  sheet  of  paper  from  the  middle  of  which  a 
suitable  aperture  has  been  cut.  The  type  of  microscope 
just  mentioned  not  only  makes  it  possible  to  examine 
the  middle  or  any  portion  of  a  large  sheet  of  paper  or 
page  of  a  book,  which  is  not  possible  with  the  ordinary 
instrument,  but  also  thus  avoids  the  danger  of  injuring 
a  document  by  folding  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  get  it  on 
the  ordinary  microscope  stage. 

If,  as  is  often  the  case,  the  exact  condition,  character, 
tint  and  shade  of  the  ink  have  any  bearing  on  the  ques- 
tion of  genuineness,  it  is  particularly  important  to  guard 
the  document  carefully  from  excessive  light,  heat  and 
moisture,  as  such  exposure  may  seriously  affect  ink  con- 
ditions. Many  fireproof  safes,  especially  when  new,  are 
somewhat  damp  and  a  questioned  document  involving 
the  question  of  the  age  of  ink  should  not  be  kept  in  such 
a  receptacle. 

It  has  been  proposed  in  connection  with  certain  in- 
quiries regarding  the  sequence  of  crossed  ink  lines  that 
an  ordinary  letter-press  copy  be  made  of  the  part  in  dis- 
pute. This  should  never  be  allowed.  Such  a  test  will 
not  ordinarily  furnish  any  information  of  value  and, 
what  is  more  serious,  will  probably  make  it  impossible 
thereafter  to  ascertain  the  fact  by  any  method  whatever. 
Certain  foreign  technical  books  describe  numerous  im- 


CARE  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  5 

practicable  methods  of  examination  in  disputed  docu- 
ment cases  that  would  inevitably  deface  if  not  actually 
destroy  a  document.  These  experiments  should,  of 
course,  not  be  allowed1. 

If  a  disputed  document  becomes  torn  or  mutilated  in 
any  way,  or  if  it  is  in  this  condition  to  begin  with,  it 
should  not  be  pasted  on  an  opaque  card.  It  is  well  in 
such  a  case  to  fasten  the  pieces  together  at  the  margins 
with  a  few  small  strips  of  transparent  adhesive  tissue 
and  then  put  the  repaired  document  between  sheets  of 
glass  as  already  described. 

In  important  inquiries  it  is  usually  advisable  as  early 
as  possible  to  put  a  disputed  document  in  the  custody  of 
the  court  or  some  public  officer  where,  under  proper  re- 
strictions, all  parties  may  have  access  to  it.2 

Finally,  the  court  stenographer  should  especially  be 
cautioned  when  marking  a  questioned  document  as  an 
exhibit,  not  to  write,  paste  a  label,  or  put  a  rubber  stamp 
impression  on  it  at  any  place  where  there  is  writing  on 
either  side  of  the  paper. 

alf  this  has  also  been  in  vain  there  is  still  a  last  but  heroic 
method  which  under  all  circumstances  injures  the  document  if  it  does 
not  destroy  it,  and  may  therefore  be  made  use  of  only  with  special 
consent  of  the  court.  This  is  the  reproduction  of  the  removed  writing 
by  heat  up  to  the  time  when  the  paper  begins  to  coal  or  turns  black.— 
Der  Nachwies  von  Schriftfalschungen,  etc.,  von  Dennstedt  und  Voight- 
lander  (1906). 

2We  think  the  better  practice  is  to  direct  that  the  deed  should  be 
placed  in  the  custody  of  the  county  clerk  with  permission  to  the 
plaintiff  to  inspect  it  and,  if  he  desires,  to  have  it  photographed. — Beck 
vs.  Bohm,  95  N.  Y.  App.  Div.  273  (1904). 


CHAPTER  II. 

CLASSES  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Documents  are  attacked  on  many  grounds  and  f or 
various  reasons,  but  the  great  majority  of  questioned 
papers  are  included  in  the  following  classes : 

(1)  Documents  with  questioned  signatures. 

(2)  Documents  containing  alleged  fraudulent  alter- 

ations. 

(3)  Holograph  documents  questioned  or  disputed. 

(4)  Documents  attacked  on  the  question  of  their  age 

or  date. 

(5)  Documents  attacked  on  the  question  of  materials 

used  in  their  production. 

(6)  Documents  investigated  on  the  question  of  type- 

writing : 

(a)  With  a  view  to  ascertaining  their  source. 

(b)  With  a  view  to  determining  their  date. 

(7)  Documents    or    writings    investigated    because 

they    identify    some    person    through    hand- 
writing : 

(a)  Anonymous  and  disputed  letters. 

(b)  Superscriptions,  registrations  and  mis- 

cellaneous writings. 

A  brief  description  of  these  more  common  classes  of 
suspected  documents  is  here  given  in  connection  with  a 
few  general  suggestions  regarding  a  preliminary  exam- 
ination of  such  papers,  and  this  brief  outline  will  also 
serve  as  a  general  survey  of  the  whole  subject. 

[6] 


CLASSES  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  7 

The  most  common  disputed  document  is  that  of  the 
first  class  and  may  be  any  one  of  the  ordinary  commer- 
cial or  legal  papers  such  as  a  check,  note,  receipt,  draft, 
order,  contract,  assignment,  will,  deed,  or  similar  paper 
the  signature  of  which  is  under  suspicion.  In  this  class 
are  found  the  traced  forgery  and  the  forgery  produced 
by  the  simulating  or  copying  process]  In  such  a  docu- 
ment the  signature  only  may  at  first  be  attacked,  but 
many  different  things  may  show  the  fraudulent  char- 
acter of  the  instrument,  and  everything  about  it  that 
in  any  way  may  throw  light  on  the  subject  should  as 
early  as  possible  be  carefully  investigated. 

At  first  view  the  signature  should  be  critically  ex- 
amined and  compared  with  genuine  signatures  and,  at 
this  time  or  later,  no  writings  should  be  used  for  com- 
parison by  those  who  are  to  testify  that  cannot  be  legally 
proved  as  standards  of  comparison.  In  such  an  examina- 
tion it  is  necessary  to  determine  whether  the  writing  in 
question  shows  the  absence  of  divergent  writing  charac- 
teristics and  the  presence  of  the  genuine  writing  habits 
and  characteristics  of  the  alleged  writer  to  a  sufficient 
extent  to  warrant  the  conclusion  that  the  writing  is  genu- 
ine, or  the  absence  of  a  sufficient  number  of  such  char- 
acteristics of  genuineness  and  the  presence  of  divergent 
characteristics  to  such  an  extent  as  to  lead  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  writing  is  not  genuine.  This  preliminary 
examination  should  not  be  hastily  made  and  judgment 
should  be  reserved  until  every  phase  bf  the  examination 
is  completed.  It  is  desirable  in  many  instances  to  make 
the  examination  at  two  sittings  with  some  time  inter- 
vening that  the  steps  may  be  carefully  reviewed  when  the 
mind  and  vision  are  unwearied. 


8  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  color  and  character  of  the  ink  of  a  questioned 
signature  should  on  first  view  always  be  carefully  ob- 
served under  suitable  magnification  and  compared  with 
the  ink  on  all  other  parts  of  the  document  and,  if  condi- 
tions warrant  it,  with  standard  inks  of  the  alleged  age  of 
the  document.  If  the  ink  is  apparently  fresher  than  the 
age  of  the  document  would  seem  to  warrant,  a  careful 
color  reading  of  it  should  be  made  and  recorded. 

The  document  if  handwritten  should  also  be  examined 
to  see  if  it  was  continuously  written  by  the  same  writer. 
The  size,  shape,  color  and  characteristics  of  the  paper 
on  which  the  document  is  written  should  be  carefully 
observed  and  the  watermark  examined,  if  any  appears, 
if  these  questions  may  by  any  possibility  have  the  slight- 
est bearing  on  the  question  of  genuineness.  Attention 
should  also  be  given  to  typewriting,  seals,  erasures  or 
changes,  interlineations,  discolorations,  thumb-tack  or 
pin  holes,  and  to  printing  when  conditions  seem  to  re- 
quire it,  even  although  it  may  at  first  appear  that  the 
signature  alone  is  questioned. 

Not  infrequently  the  attempt  is  made  to  hide  the  evi- 
dences of  forgery  in  a  fraudulent  document  by  some  al- 
leged accident  or  condition  by  which  the  paper  is  partial- 
ly defaced  or  torn,  or  it  may  be  badly  soiled  or  discolored 
so  as  to  make  it  more  difficult  to  show  its  real  character. 
Such  a  condition  is  an  additional  reason  why  the  docu- 
ment should  be  subjected  to  an  even  more  rigid  examina- 
tion than  would  otherwise  be  given  it. 

In  the  second  class  of  questioned  documents  are  in- 
cluded all  those  in  which  it  is  alleged  some  alteration  has 
been  made  by  erasure,  addition,  interlineation  or  substi- 
tution bv  reason  of  which  the  effect  or  value  of  the  docu- 


CLASSES  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  9 

ment  is  materially  changed.  In  connection  with  this 
class  of  documents  questions  may  arise  regarding  the 
order  or  sequence  of  writing  as  shown  by  crossed  lines, 
age  of  writing,  continuity  of  writing,  erasures  and 
changes,  identity  of  ink,  identity  of  pen  and  pen  condi- 
tion, self -consciousness  or  unusual  care  in  writing,  and, 
under  certain  conditions,  the  question  may  arise  whether 
writing  preceded  or  followed  the  folding  of  the  paper. 
This  important  class  of  questioned  documents  also  in- 
cludes all  varieties  of  "raised"  checks,  drafts  and  notes 
as  well  as  fraudulent  interlineations  in  contracts,  deeds, 
wills  and  other  legal  papers. 

The  third  class  of  suspected  papers  comprises  those  in 
which  the  writing  of  an  entire  written  document  is  all 
questioned.  Such  complete  documents,  if  fraudulent, 
are  usually  vulnerable  in  many  possible  particulars  and 
should'  be  subjected  to  the  most  searching  scrutiny  in- 
cluding consideration  of  paper,  watermarks,  ink,  pens, 
style  or  system  of  writing,  natural  variation  or  variety 
in  writing,  wording,  subject-matter,  seals,  folding  and 
ruling.  Holograph  documents  are  more  fully  discussed 
in  the  chapter  on  simulated  forgeries. 

Tickets  of  many  kinds  are  frequently  forged  or  coun- 
terfeited, as  are  also  rare  stamps,  valuable  manuscripts, 
certificates,  letters  of  introduction  and  recommendation, 
letters  of  credit,  diplomas,  marriage  certificates,  mar- 
riage contracts,  court  papers,  book  plates,  and  especial- 
ly autographs  and  letters  of  famous  people,  and  also 
commissions,  discharges  and  many  other  kinds  of  docu- 
ments, some  of  which  would  be  included  in  the  third  class 
named  above,  but  which  cannot  all  be  discussed  in  this 
place. 


10  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  fourth  class  of  questioned  documents  includes 
those  in  which  the  age  of  an  instrument  or  the  age  of 
some  part  of  it  is  investigated,  or  a  paper  in  which  the 
comparative  age  of  different  parts  may  have  some  bear- 
ing on  the  question  of  its  genuineness.  Interesting 
papers  of  this  class  are  often  brought  forward  which 
purport  to  be  ancient  documents  of  great  importance, 
and  which,  it  is  usually  claimed,  were  found  in  some 
strange  place  or  under  peculiar  conditions,  and  these 
circumstances  are,  as  a  rule,  minutely  detailed. 

Documents  have  frequently  been  shown  to  be  false 
because  they  were  dated  many  years  before  the  paper 
was  made  on  which  they  were  written,  and  this  is  only 
one  illustration  of  the  fifth  class  of  questioned  docu- 
ments or  those  shown  to  be  fraudulent  by  the  examina- 
tion of  materials.  Other  matters  for  investigation  under 
this  head  are,  type  printed  forms,  lithographed  forms, 
typewriting,  seals,  envelopes,  stamps,  or  any  tangible 
thing  that  may  have  a  date  value. 

A  comparatively  new  class  of  questioned  papers  is 
included  under  the  sixth  division  and  this  interesting 
subject  is  discussed  in  the  chapter  on  questioned  type- 
writing. 

The  seventh  class  of  questioned  documents  are  of 
great  variety,  and  of  all  disputed  papers  they  are  per- 
haps most  frequently  brought  under  investigation.  This 
class  includes  all  documents,  papers,  writings  or  instru- 
ments which  by  their  handwriting  and  contents  tend 
to  identify  some  person.  The  most  common  documents 
of  this  class  are  all  kinds  of  anonymous  and  disputed 
letters.  These  may  be  ordinary  letters  offered  as  evi- 
dence, but  usually  are  abusive,  warning,  obscene,  or  scur- 


CLASSES  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  11 

rilous  communications,  or  any  of  the  great  variety  of 
blackmailing,  black-hand,  and  threatening  letters  which 
so  frequently  become  the  subject  of  legal  inquiry. 

Another  important  class  of  letters  which  it  frequently 
becomes  important  to  identify  are  those  written  by 
persons  under  suspicion  or  arrest,  for  the  purpose  of 
diverting  suspicion  from  the  writers.  A  suspected  let- 
ter should  be  subjected  to  the  most  comprehensive  and 
thorough  examination,  which,  in  many  cases,  will  con- 
clusively identify  its  author  or  show  the  fraudulent 
character  of  the  document  if  it  is  fraudulent. 

It  will  be  seen  in  considering  these  various  classes  of 
disputed  papers  that  there  are  two  related  but  quite  dis- 
tinct questions  regarding  handwriting.  The  first  ques- 
tion is  whether  a  certain  writing  is  genuine  or  forged. 
In  such  a  case  the  writing  is  usually  denied  by  the  writer, 
or  those  who  represent  him,  and  the  question  to  be  de- 
termined is  whether  it  is  genuine  writing,  an  imitation 
of  genuine  writing,  or  a  wholly  different  writing.  The 
second  handwriting  question  in  such  inquiries,  as  out- 
lined in  the  heading,  is  whether  a  certain  writing  will 
serve  to  identify  the  writer.  Such  writing  may  be  and 
usually  is  disguised.  If  disguised  then  the  question  is, 
did  the  writer  attempt  to  hide  his  personality  and  fail 
to  do  so,  or  is  the  writing  not  disguised  and  actually  the 
writing  of  another  person?  In  this  class  are  included 
disguised  anonymous  letters  and  also  ordinary  letters 
and  papers  offered  as  evidence  that  by  their  writing 
serve  as  a  means  of  identification. 

In  disguised  writing  the  effort  of  the  writer  is  direct- 
ed to  the  exclusion  of  personal  writing  characteristics 
by  the  adoption  of  characteristics  foreign  to  his  own 


12  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

writing.  The  problem  in  the  examination  of  such  writ- 
ing is  to  discover  and  weigh  against  each  other  involun- 
tary and  unconscious  genuine  characteristics  and  volun- 
tary adopted  or  foreign  characteristics. 

A  simulated  writing1  is  one  in  which  the  attempt  is 
made  to  copy  or  imitate  the  writing  of  another  as  is  done 
in  an  ordinary  signature  forgery.  To  be  entirely  suc- 
cessful it  is  obvious  that  such  writing  by  one  who  knows 
how  to  write,  involves  a  double  process  and  must  not 
only  contain  the  features  of  the  writing  imitated,  but 
must  also  exclude  the  writer's  own  personal  writing 
characteristics.  A  writing  that  is  simply  disguised,  as 
is  usually  the  case  in  anonymous  letters,  is  one  in  which 
the  writer  only  seeks  to  hide  his  own  personality  with- 
out assuming  that  of  any  other  particular  person.  It  is 
reasonable  to  expect  that  a  simulated  writing  will  re- 
semble in  some  degree  the  writing  it  seeks  to  imitate, 
and  it  is  equally  apparent  that  a  disguised  writing  will 
differ  in  some  measure  from  the  usual  writing  of  one 
who  thus  attempts  to  hide  his  own  personality. 

The  simple  question  sometimes  arises  whether  a  com- 
plete letter  or  other  document  containing  considerable 
matter,  and  which  is  written  rapidly  and  freely,  is  in  the 
actual  handwriting  of  a  certain  writer  admitted  speci- 
mens of  whose  writing  of  a  similar  character  are  shown. 
In  such  an  inquiry  it  is  simply  necessary  to  determine 
to  what  an  extent  all  the  variable  characteristics  and 
habits  of  two  natural  and  undisguised  handwritings  will 
accidentally  coincide.  With  sufficient  disputed  and 

1  Simulate.  To  assume  or  have  the  mere  appearance  or  form  of, 
without  the  reality;  assume  falsely  or  fraudulently  the  condition  or 
character  of;  act  or  take  on  a  form  in  imitation  of;  counterfeit;  imi- 
tate.— Standard  Dictionary. 


CLASSES  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  13 

standard  writing  of  this  class  by  the  same  writer,  proof 
of  identity  reaches  such  a  degree  of  certainty  that  it 
often  leads  to  confession  or  disappearance  of  the  writer. 

In  any  considerable  quantity  of  writing  it  is  usually 
possible  to  discover  and  show  clearly  whether  a  writing 
is  natural  and  free  or  whether  it  is  unnatural  and 
feigned.  A  feigned  hand  is  almost  certain  to  be  incon- 
sistent with  itself  in  important  features  and  will  not  be 
free  and  rapid.  If  such  a  writing  is  free  and  rapid 
it  is  certain  to  show,  when  carefully  analyzed,  many  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  natural  writing  of  the  writer 
no  matter  what  disguise  is  employed. 

When  a  signature  is  shown  to  be  fraudulent  the  ques- 
tion naturally  arises,  as  to  who  committed  the  forgery. 
This  question  is  usually  asked  in  every  such  case,  but 
cannot  often  be  answered  with  much  certainty,  judging 
from  the  writing  alone.  It  is  much  easier  to  show  that  a 
fraudulent  signature  is  not  genuine  than  it  is  to  show 
that  such  a  writing  is  actually  the  work  of  a  particular 
writer.  A  forgery  is  a  more  or  less  successful  imita- 
tion of  the  writing  of  another  and  it  is  seldom  that  the 
forger  will  incorporate  in  the  few  letters  of  a  single 
signature  a  sufficient  number  of  the  characteristics  of 
his  own  writing  to  serve  to  identify  him  positively  as  the 
writer. 

When  the  attempt  is  made  simply  to  disguise  a 
quantity  of  writing,  as  in  anonymous  letters,  the  prob- 
lem is  a  very  different  one  and  it  is  usually  possible  to 
show  with  much  certainty  who  was  the  writer,  but  where 
only  a  signature  is  forged  by  imitation  or  tracing  it  is 
usually  very  difficult  to  discover  from  the  writing  itself 
who  actually  did  write  it,  unless,  as  occasionally  hap- 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

pens,  the  forgery  is  practically  an  undisguised  specimen 
of  the  writing  of  the  forger.  The  defects  or  shortcom- 
ings in  a  fraudulent  signature  are  frequently  of  a  char- 
acter that  point  toward  the  writing  of  the  forger,  but 
alone  are  not  often  sufficient  to  identify  him  positively. 
It  thus  follows  that  it  is  much  easier  to  prove  forgery 
in  a  civil  case  or  to  establish  the  crime  of  uttering  a 
forged  paper  than,  from  the  writing  alone,  to  fix  the 
crime  of  forgery  on  some  individual. 

The  degree  of  certainty  of  proof  of  forgery,  or  proof 
of  identity  through  handwriting,  necessarily  differs 
enormously  in  different  cases  and  under  differing  cir- 
cumstances and  ranges  all  the  way  from  a  mere  con- 
jecture to  conclusive  proof.1  In  some  cases  the  basis 
for  any  conclusion  whatever  may  be  very  meager  on 
account  of  the  nature  of  the  question  and  an  opinion  is 
but  little  more  than  a  mere  conjecture  and  is  of  little 
value  as  evidence.  Then  again,  such  evidence  may  be 
so  confirmatory  of  itself  in  its  various  phases,  so  cumu- 
lative in  force  when  the  many  conditions  are  considered, 
that  it  is  irresistibly  convincing  to  a  logical  and  unpre- 
judiced mind.2  In  many  cases  handwriting  in  sufficient 
quantity  and  kind  may  afford  the  most  positive  and  con- 
clusive evidence  of  human  identification. 

1  Upon  principle,  therefore,  as  well  as  from  the  necessity  of  the 
case,  proof  of  handwriting-,  under  proper  restrictions,  is  as  has  been 
seen,  everywhere  admitted.  Moreover,  as  has  been  well  said,  it  seems 
that  this  kind  of  evidence,  like  all  probable  evidence,  admits  of  every 
degree  of  certainty  from  the  lowest  presumption  to  the  highest  moral 
certainty. — American  and  English  Encyclopedia  of  Law,  Second  Edi- 
tion, Vol.  XV.  283  (1903). 

-'From  every  standpoint  from  which  the  examination  of  the  evi- 
dence has  been  considered,  and  the  disputed  points  therein  investi- 
gated, the  mind  of  the  court  has  been  irresistibly  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  signatures  of  Philinda  Terwilliger  to  the  deed  X  and  to 
the  will  were  never  signed  by  her,  and  that  both  of  said  signatures 
are  false  and  forged. — Green  vs.  Terwilliger,  56  Fed.  384.  407  (1892). 


CLASSES  OF  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  15 

A  document  suspected  of  being  fraudulent  should  be 
subjected  to  an  immediate  and  thorough  examination. 
The  value  of  promptness  is  especially  urged.  Import- 
ant interests  are  sometimes  endangered  by  a  delay  of 
only  a  few  days  and  many  questions  regarding  docu- 
ments may  arise  that  require  the  earliest  possible  at- 
tention if  the  true  conditions  are  to  be  known  with  cer- 
tainty and  shown  with  clearness.  It  may  seem  unneces- 
sary to  make  this  suggestion,  but  in  many  instances  such 
preliminary  examinations  are  not  only  of  the  most  hasty 
and  superficial  character,  but  are  so  long  postponed  that 
much  of  their  value  is  lost.  The  preliminary  examination 
should  not  only  be  prompt,  but  also  should  be  thorough. 

The  procedure  often  followed  would  seem  to  in- 
dicate a  belief  that  after  incessant  but  utterly  unsys- 
tematic and  purposeless  staring  at  a  document  it  would 
in  some  mysterious  way  proclaim  itself  as  false  or  true, 
as  good  or  bad,  and  frequently  the  hope  seems  to  be 
entertained  that  the  answer  will  appear  even  to  the  un- 
skilled and  the  inexperienced.  One  might  as  well  expect 
to  obtain  by  the  same  procedure  an  interpretation  of  the 
ancient  inscriptions  on  an  Egyptian  obelisk. 


CHAPTER  III. 

STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON. 

One  of  the  first  steps  in  the  investigation  of  a  sus- 
pected or  disputed  writing  should  be  the  seeking  out  of 
genuine  writings  with  which  it  may  be  compared. 
Strange  to  say,  in  many  instances  this  common  sense 
proceeding  is  long  delayed  even  in  those  jurisdictions 
where  standard  writings  are  admitted. 

Unfortunately  this  rational  method  cannot  be  fol- 
lowed at  all  in  those  states  and  courts  where  only  "writ- 
ings in  the  case  for  other  purposes"  can  be  used  for 
comparison.  Under  this  peculiar  and  unfortunate  con- 
dition it  is  usual  that  only  very  inadequate  if  not  wholly 
improper  standards  are  available  and  under  such  condi- 
tions it  is  not  surprising  that  so-called  proof  of  hand- 
writing is  often  a  mere  farce.  The  frequent  outcome  of 
this  old  practice  has  been  briefly  discussed  in  the  intro- 
duction of  this  book. 

England  changed  the  old  practice  by  statute  in  1854, 
and  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut,  to  their  honor  be  it 
said,  have  from  the  first  permitted  comparison  of  hand- 
writing with  properly  proved  standard  writing,  but  the 
courts  of  numerous  states,  strange  to  say,  have  refused 
to  change  the  practice.  The  average  man  is  perfectly 
astounded  to  learn  that  a  writing  cannot  be  proved  by 
going  out  and  getting  undoubtedly  genuine  writing  to 
compare  it  with.  New  York  did  not  change  the  practice 
until  1880,  Pennsylvania  did  not  make  the  change  until 

[16] 


Insert  at  page  17  of  Osborn  on  Questioned  Documents 


NEW    LAWS 

RELATING  TO  THE 

Proof  of  Handwriting 


Compliments  of 
ALBERT  S.  OSBORN 

Examiner  of   Disputed   Documents 
2264-6  Woolworth   Building 

233  Broadway 
NEW  YORK,  N.  Y. 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON. 

One  of  the  first  steps  in  the  investigation  of  a  suspected  or  disputed 
writing  should  be  the  seeking  out  of  genuine  writings  with  which  it  may  be 
compared.  Strange  to  say,  in  many  instances  this  common-sense  proceeding 
is  long  delayed  even  in  those  jurisdictions  where  standard  writings  are  ad- 
mitted. 

Unfortunately  this  rational  method  cannot  be  followed  at  all  in  those 
states  and  courts  where  only  "writings  in  the  case  for  other  purposes"  can 
be  used  for  comparison.  Under  this  peculiar  and  unfortunate  condition  it 
is  usual  that  only  very  inadequate  if  not  wholly  improper  standards  are 
available  and  under  such  conditions  it  is  not  surprising  that  so-called  proof 
of  handwriting  is  often  a  mere  farce.  The  frequent  outcome  of  this  old 
practice  has  been  briefly  discussed  in  the  introduction  of  this  book. 

England  changed  the  old  practice  by  statute  in  1854,  and  Massachusetts 
and  Connecticut,  to  their  honor  be  it  said,  have  from  the  first  permitted 
comparison  of  handwriting  with  properly  proved  standard  writing,  but  the 
courts  of  numerous  states,  strange  to  say,  *have  refused  to  change  the  prac- 
tice. The  average  man  is  perfectly  astounded  to  learn  that  a  writing  cannot 
be  proved  by  going  out  and  getting  undoubtedly  genuine  writing  to  compare 
it  with.  New  York  did  not  change  the  practice  until  1880,  Pennsylvania 
did  not  make  the  change  until  1895,  and  all  the  courts  of  several  states 
and  the  United  States  federal  courts  in  all  the  states  in  criminal  cases,  are 
still  under  the  old  procedure. 

One  of  the  (principal  objections  to  the  ancient  procedure  was  not  necessarily 
that  no  writing  whatever  was  available  for  comparison,  but  because  that 
which  might  be  available,  that  happened  to  be  "in  the  case  for  other 
purposes,"  sometimes  was  worse  than  none  as  an  exclusive  basis  of  com- 
parison. Many  important  cases  have  been  tried  with  only  one  standard  sig- 
nature for  comparison,  and  that  not  only  of  a  different  class,  but  sometimes 
written  thirty  years  or  more  before  or  after  the  date  of  the  disputed  writing. 

Under  this  old  practice  where  the  standard  writing  came  into  the  case 
"by  accident,"  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  such  testimony  often  deserved 
the  criticism  it  received  and  the  whole  /history  of  the  subject  has  been  clouded 
by  this  unfortunate  procedure.  From  Questioned  Documents,  By  Albert  8. 
Osborn,  Chapter  III,  pp.  17,  18,  Published  1910.  Introduction  by  Professor 
John  H.  Wigmore,  Author  of  Wigmore  on  Evidence. 


NEW  LAWS  RELATING  TO  ADMIS-SION  OP  STAND- 
ARDS OF  COMPARISON  IN  PROVING 
HANDWRITING. 

UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA. 

AN  ACT  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  United  States,  session  of  1913; 
Approved  by  the  President,  February  26th,  1913. 

' '  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  as- 
sembled, That  in  any  proceeding  before  a  court  or  judicial 
officer  of  the  United  States  where  the  genuineness  of  the 
handwriting  of  any  person  may  be  involved,  any  admitted 
or  proved  handwriting  of  such  person  shall  be  competent 
evidence  as  a  basis  for  comparison  by  witnesses,  or  by  the 
jury,  court,  or  officer  conducting  such  proceeding,  to  prove 
or  disprove  such  genuineness/' 


THE  STATE  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA. 

1913 — CHAPTER  52 — AN  ACT  extending  the  handwritings 
to  be  used  as  standards  for  comparisons  in  trials. 

The  General  Assembly  of  North  Carolina  do  enact: 

Section  1.  That  in  all  trials  in  this  State,  when  it  may 
otherwise  be  competent  and  relevant  to  compare  hand- 
writings, a  comparison  of  a  disputed  writing  with  any 
writing  proved  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  judge  to  be 
genuine,  shall  be  permitted  to  be  made  by  witnesses,  and 
such  writings  and  the  evidence  of  witnesses  respecting  the 
same  may  be  submitted  to  the  court  and  jury  as  evidence 
of  the  genuineness  or  otherwise  of  the  writing  in  dispute : 
Provided,  this  shall  not  apply  to  pending  actions. 

In  the  General  Assembly  read  three  times  and  ratified 
this  the  5th  day  of  March,  1913. 


THE  STATE  OF  PENNSYLVANIA. 

REVISED  STATUTE.    ENACTED  AND  APPROVED,  1913. 


Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of 
Representatives  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Pennsylvania  in 
General  Assembly  met  and  its  is  hereby  enacted  by  the 
authority  of  the  same  That  where  there  is  a  question  as 
to  any  writing  the  opinions  of  the  following  persons  shall 
be  deemed  to  be  relevant, 

(a)  The   opinion   of  any  persons   acquainted  with   the 

handwriting  of  the  supposed  writer. 

(b)  The  opinion  of  those  who  have  had  special  experi- 

ence with  or  who  have  pursued  special  studies 
relating  to  documents,  handwriting  and  alterations 
thereof  who  are  herein  called  experts. 

Sec.  2.  It  shall  be  competent  for  experts  in  giving  their 
testimony,  under  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  to  make  com- 
parison of  documents  and  comparison  of  disputed  hand- 
writing with  any  documents  or  writing  admitted  to  be 
genuine,  or  proven  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  judge  to  be 
genuine,  .and  the  evidence  of  such  experts  respecting  the 
same  shall  be  submitted  to  the  jury  as  evidence  of  the 
genuineness  or  otherwise  of  the  writing  in  dispute. 

Sec,  3.  It  shall  be  competent  for  experts,  in  formulating 
thejr  opinions  to  the  court  and  jury,  to  place  the  genuine 
and  disputed  signatures  or  writings  in  juxtaposition  and 
to  draw  the  attention  of  the  jury  thereto;  and  it  shall, 
furthermore,  be  competent  for  counsel  to  require  of  an 
expert  a  statement  of  the  principles  on  which  he  has  based 
his  work,  the  details  of  his  work,  and  his  opinion  that  the 
results  are  important  to  the  point  at  issue,  or  the  reason- 
ing, analysis,  and  investigation  by  which  he  has  arrived  at 
his  opinion. 

Sec.  4.  The  opinions  of  the  witnesses  to  handwriting 
being  submitted  as  competent  testimony  to  the  jury,  the 
final  determination  as  to  whether  any  particular  hand- 
writing is  genuine  or  simulated  shall  remain,  as  heretofore, 
a  question  for  the  jury  on  all  the  evidence -submitted. 

Sec.  5.  All  provisions  of  this  act  shall  apply  to  all  courts 
of  judicature,  criminal  and  civil,  and  to  all  persons  having, 
by  law  or  consent  of  parties,  authority  to  hear,  receive,  and 
examine  evidence. 


THE  STATE  OF  INDIANA. 

CHAPTER  312 — AN  ACT  relating  to  proof  of  signatures  and 
handwriting  (S.  545.    Approved  March  15,  1913). 

COURTS — SIGNATURES — HANDWRITING    COMPLETE    EVIDENCE. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
State  of  Indiana,  That  in  any  proceedings  before  a  court 
or  judicial  officer  of  the  State  of  Indiana  where  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  handwriting  of  any  person  may  be  involved,  any 
admitted  or  proved  handwriting  of  such  person  shall  be 
competent  evidence  as  a  basis  for  comparison  by  witnesses, 
or  by  the  jury,  court  or  officer  conducting  such  proceeding, 
to  prove  or  disprove  such  genuineness. 

Repeal. 

Sec.  2.  All  laws  and  parts  of  laws  in  conflict  with  this 
act  are  hereby  repealed. 

THE  STATE  OF  ALABAMA. 

No.  90)  Regular  Session  1915.  (S.  42. 

AN   ACT 

To  further  regulate  the  admission  of  evidence  concerning 
disputed  writings. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Legislature  of  Alabama: 

Section  1.  That  comparison  of  a  disputed  writing  with 
any  writing  admitted  to  be  genuine  or  proven  to  ,the 
reasonable  satisfaction  of  the  court,  to  be  ^genuine  shall 
in  civil  ap4i  criminal  cases  be  permitted  to  {ba  made  by 
witnesses  who  are  qualified  as  experts  or  being  familiar 
with  the  handwriting  of  the  person  whose  handwriting  is 
in  question  and  such  writings  and  the  evidence  of  witnesses 
respecting  the  same  may  be  submitted  to  the  court  or  jury 
trying  the  case  as  evidence  of  the  genuineness  or  other- 
wise of  the  writings  in  dispute. 

Sec.  2.  This  act  shall  take  effect  sixty  days  after  the 
approval  thereof. 

Approved  March  6,  1915, 


THE  STATE  OF  MICHIGAN. 

THE  JUDICATURE  ACT  OF  1915.    APPROVED  MAY  18, 1915. 

Proof  of  Signatures  or  handwriting. 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

See.  51.  Whenever  in  any  suit  or  proceeding  in  any  of 
the  courts  of  this  State,  it  shall  be  necessary  or  proper  to 
prove  the  signature  or  the  handwriting  of  any  person,  it 
shall  be  competent  to  introduce  in  evidence  for  the  purpose 
of  comparison,  any  specimen  or  specimens  of  the  handwrit- 
ing or  signature  of  such  person,  admitted  or  proved  to  the 
satisfaction  of  the  court  to  be  genuine,  whether  or  not  the 
paper  on  which  -such  handwriting  or  signature  appears  is 
one  admissible  in  evidence  or  connected  with  the  case  or 
not ;  PEOVIDED,  That  if  such  paper  is  not  one  admissible 
in  evidence  for  some  other  purpose,  or  connected  with  the 
case,  it  shall  not  be  admissible  in  evidence  for  the  purpose 
of  comparison  unless  it  was  made  before  the  controversy 
arose  concerning  which  such  suit  or  proceeding  was 
brought. 

THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK. 

PERMISSION  TO  PHOTOGRAPH  DOCUMENTS. 

Par.  803.  (Am'd  1909,  1913)  Chase's  Code  Civil  Proced- 
ure. Court  may  direct  discovery  of  books,  etc. 

A  court  of  record,  other  than  a  justices'  court  in  a  city, 
has  power  to  compel  a  party  to  an  action  pending  therein, 
to  produce  and  discover,  or  to  give  to  the  other  party,  an 
inspection  and  copy,  or  permission  to  take  a  copy  or  photo- 
graph, of  a  book,  document,  or  other  paper,  or  to  make 
discovery  of  any  article  of  property,  in  his  possession  or 
under  his  control,  relating  to  the  merits  of  the  action,  or 
of  the  defence  therein. 

(The  1913  Revision  by  the  Legislature  consists  of  the 
addition  of  words  "or  photograph/') 


THE  STATE  OF  ILLINOIS. 

AN  ACT  concerning  proof  of  handwriting  and  to  permit 
proof  of  handwriting  to  be  made  by  comparison. 

Section  1.  Be  it  enacted  by  the  People  of  Illinois  repre- 
sented in  The  General  Assembly :  That  in  all  courts  of  the 
State  it  shall  be  lawful  to  prove  handwriting  by  comparison 
made  by  the  witness  or  jury  with  writings  properly  in  the 
files  or  records  of  the  case,  admitted  in  evidence  or  treated 
as  genuine  or  admitted  to  be  genuine,  by  the  party  against 
whom  the  evidence  is  offered,  or  proved  to  be  genuine  to 
the  satisfaction  of  the  court. 

Sec.  2.  Before  a  standard  of  writing  shall  be  admitted 
in  evidence  by  the  court  for  comparison  such  notice  thereof 
as  under  all  the  circumstances  of  the  case  is  reasonable 
shall  first  be  given  to  the  opposite  party  or  his  attorney. 

Sec.  3.  A  reasonable  opportunity  to  examine  such  pro- 
posed standards  shall  on  motion  duly  made  be  accorded 
the  opposite  party,  his  attorney  and  witnesses,  prior  to 
the  introduction  in  evidence  of  such  standards  and  the 
court  may,  in  its  discretion,  impound  the  same  with  the 
clerk  of  the  court  for  that  purpose. 

Approved  July  23d,  1915. 


. 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  17 

1895,  and  all  the  courts  of  several  states  and  the  United 
States  federal  courts  in  all  the  states  in  criminal  cases, 
are  still  under  the  old  procedure1. 

One  of  the  principal  objections  to  the  ancient  pro- 
cedure was  not  necessarily  that  no  writing  whatever  was 
available  for  comparison,  but  because  that  which  might 
be  available,  that  happened  to  be  "in  the  case  for  other 
purposes,"  sometimes  was  worse  than  none  as  an  ex- 
clusive basis  of  comparison.  Many  important  cases  have 
been  tried  with  only  one  standard  signature  for  compari- 
son, and  that  not  only  of  a  different  class,  but  sometimes 


lrThe  whole  subject  of  handwriting  comparison  is  most  ably  dis- 
cussed in  that  valuable  collection  of  legal  information  entitled  Lawyers' 
Reports  Annotated  and  known  to  every  lawyer  as  "L.  R.  A."  In  an 
extended  note  (62  L.  R.  A.  818)  much  valuable  information  on  the 
subject  will  be  found. 

In  connection  with  another  exhaustive  and  scholarly  discussion 
of  the  subject,  Prof.  John  H.  Wigmore  gives  in  his  great  work,  Wig- 
more  on  Evidence  (1904-1907),  a  list  of  the  states  that  permit 
the  introduction  of  standards  of  comparison  in  handwriting  cases. 
From  these  two  sources,  in  connection  with  recent  inquiry  on  the  sub- 
ject, a  list  of  the  states  is  given  with  date  of  change  from  the  old 
common  law  practice.  The  dates  mostly  refer  to  the  years  when 
statutes  were  passed,  but  in  a  few  states  the  change  was  made  by 
judicial  decisions.  In  a  few  instances  the  date  is  somewhat  uncertain, 
but  the  date  given  is  approximately  correct.  West  Virginia  passed 
the  statute  admitting  standards  in  1907,  and  the  Illinois  legislature 
passed  such  a  statute  at  its  last  session  (1909),  but  because  of  some 
technical  irregularity  it  will  be  necessary  to  submit  the  matter  to  the 
legislature  again.  It  is  surprising  to  many  to  know  how  new  a  thing 
real  handwriting  comparison  is  in  most  courts  of  law. 

The  list,  including  the  recent  changes,  is  as  follows: 

California,  1872;  Colorado,  1893;  Connecticut,  1791;  Delaware, 
1881;  Florida,  1892;  Georgia,  1895;  Iowa,  1851;  Kansas,  1872; 
Kentucky,  1886;  Louisiana,  1866;  Maine,  1822;  Maryland,  1888; 
Massachusetts,  1813  and  earlier;  Minnesota,  1886;  Mississippi,  1874; 
Missouri,  1895;  Montana,  1895;  Nebraska,  1867;  New  Hampshire,  1852; 
New  Jersey,  1877;  New  York,  1880;  Oklahoma,  1900;  Ohio,  1863; 
Oregon,  1892;  Pennsylvania,  1895;  Rhode  Island,  1872;  South  Dakota, 
1905;  Tennessee,  1889;  Vermont,  1832;  Virginia,  1884;  Washington, 
1896;  West  Virginia,  1907;  Wisconsin,  1898. 

The  states  still  continuing  the  old  practice  unchanged  or  in  which 
the  procedure  is  mixed  or  doubtful  are:  Alabama,  Arkansas,  District 
of  Columbia,  Idaho,  Illinois,  Indiana,  Michigan,  New  Mexico,  North 
Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Texas,  Utah,  and  the  Federal  Courts. 


18  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

written  thirty  years  or  more  before  or  after  the  date  of 
the  disputed  writing. 

Under  this  old  practice  where  the  standard  writing 
came  into  the  case  "by  accident,"  it  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at  that  such  testimony  often  deserved  the  criticism  it 
received  and  the  whole  history  of  the  subject  has  been 
clouded  by  this  unfortunate  procedure. 

Under  the  modern  practice,  permitting  the  introduc- 
tion of  writings  for  the  purposes  of  comparison,  abuses 
may  creep  in  and  justice  be  defeated,  but  this  possibil- 
ity is  greatly  reduced  as  compared  with  results  under 
the  old  rules.  With  a  competent  judge  and  counsel  of 
intelligence  no  unfairness  to  either  side  will  result  from 
the  modern  practice  and  the  truth  will  be  much  more 
likely  to  prevail.  Certain  simple  precautions  may  be 
necessary  for  the  guidance  of  those  who  have  not  had 
experience  with  handwriting  cases. 

A  questioned  signature  may  be  so  unnatural  as  writ- 
ing and  so  drawn  and  patched  that  its  fraudulent  char- 
acter is  quite  evident  when  these  things  alone  are  clear- 
ly shown,  and  in  some  cases  the  exact  identity  of  two  or 
more  signatures  to  a  disputed  document  may  in  itself 
be  sufficient  to  show  their  intrinsic  fraudulent  character, 
but  the  real  nature  of  a  disputed  writing,  in  most  cases, 
must  finally  be  legally  determined  by  actually  compar- 
ing it  with  other  writings  which  are  proved  or  admitted 
to  be  genuine. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  best  standards  of  comparison 
are  those  of  the  same  general  class  as  the  questioned 
writing  and  as  nearly  as  possible  of  the  same  date.  Such 
standards  should,  as  a  rule,  include  all  between  certain 
dates  covering  a  period  of  time  both  before  and  after 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  19 

the  date  of  the  writing  in  dispute.  The  amount  of  writ- 
ing necessary  for  comparison  differs  in  different  cases, 
but  enough  should  always  be  obtained  to  show  clearly 
the  writing  habits  of  the  one  whose  writing  is  under  in- 
vestigation. A  positive  conclusion  that  a  signature  is 
fraudulent  can  sometimes  be  reached  by  comparison 
with  a  small  amount  of  genuine  writing,  especially,  as 
stated  above,  if  the  disputed  signature  is  a  bungling 
forgery  that  is  suspicious  in  itself.  More  standard  writ- 
ing may,  therefore,  be  necessary  as  a  basis  for  positive 
opinion  that  a  writing  is  genuine  than  is  necessary  to 
show  that  it  is  fraudulent. 

Several  signatures  should  always  be  obtained,  if  pos- 
sible, before  any  final  decision  is  rendered,  five  signa- 
tures always  constituting  a  more  satisfactory  basis  for 
an  opinion  than  one,  and  ten  being  better  than  five.  It 
is  not  often  helpful  to  use  more  than  fifty  to  seventy-  //' 
five,  except  in  unusual  cases,  and  it  is  not  usually  desir- 
able to  use  those  of  widely  different  dates  if  sufficient 
contemporary  writings  of  the  right  class  can  be  obtained. 

Notwithstanding  the  common  practice  of  bankers  in 
this  regard,  it  is  always  dangerous  to  base  a  positive 
conclusion  that  a  suspected  signature  is  genuine  on  a 
comparison  of  it  with  only  one  genuine  signature.  For 
comparison  with  a  disputed  letter  one  good  complete 
standard  letter  may  be  sufficient,  but  in  such  an  inquiry 
more  should  always  be  obtained  if  possible.  Many  er- 
rors in  the  examination  of  questioned  writing  are  due 
to  the  fact  that  an  adequate  amount  of  standard  writing 
is  not  obtained  before  a  final  decision  is  given.  The  com- 
petent examiner  will  decline  to  give  any  opinion  until  a 
satisfactory  basis  for  such  an  opinion  is  available. 


20  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

As  stated  at  the  beginning,  the  writings  most  to  be 
depended  upon  as  standards  are  always  those  bearing 
dates  nearest  to  the  date  of  the  disputed  writing  and  of 
the  same  general  class.  This  is  true  for  the  reason  that 
writing  of  different  individuals  varies  in  differing  de- 
grees as  written  at  different  times  and  for  different 
purposes,  and  the  only  way  to  learn  of  these  habits  of 
writing  of  any  writer  is  through  standard  writing. 

Some  writers  have  formal  business  signatures  for 
checks,  legal  documents  and  important  papers,  and  care- 
less or  unconventional  signatures  for  familiar  letters  or 
similar  writings,  although,  as  a  rule,  these  two  classes 
of  signatures  are  used  interchangeably  to  some  extent 
by  most  writers.  It  is  obvious  that  the  conditions  last 
named  would  affect  the  value  of  either  class  of  such 
writings  as  exclusive  standards  of  comparison  with  a 
writing  of  the  other  class.  Certainly  with  the  average 
writer  there  is  no  appreciable  difference  in  signatures 
due  alone  to  the  fact  that  they  are  attached  to  ordinary 
business  documents  of  varying  degrees  of  importance. 

The  signatures  of  the  great  majority  of  writers  do 
not  differ  in  general  style  from  their  other  writing  and 
in  such  cases  it  is  entirely  proper  to  compare  signatures 
and  general  writing,  such  as  the  body  writing  of  letters 
/  and  other  written  documents.  The  signatures  of  some 
writers,  however,  differ  in  certain  radical  and  pro- 
nounced particulars  from  their  general  writing,  in  which 
case  signatures  should  be  compared  only  with  signatures 
and  general  writing  with  general  writing.  In  many 
instances,  however,  the  writing  of  signatures  influences 
general  writing  in  certain  very  significant  particulars. 
Peculiar  formations,  combinations  or  individual  habits 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  21 

which  become  fixed  by  being  often  repeated  in  frequent- 
ly written  signatures  may  unmistakably  affect  general 
writing  where  such  letters,  forms  or  combinations  ap- 
pear. In  such  a  case  writing  other  than  signatures  may 
be  particularly  valuable  for  comparison  with  a  peculiar 
questioned  signature,  or  genuine  signatures  as  stand- 
ards may  become  very  useful  in  identifying  the  author 
of  such  a  disputed  letter  or  a  general  writing  by  such  a 
writer. 

The  most  significant  writing  characteristics  persist  to 
a  greater  or  less  extent  under  whatever  circumstances 
writing  is  produced,  but  here  again  the  habits  of  dif- 
ferent individuals  vary  greatly.  A  conclusion  that  two 
sets  of  writings  are  not  by  the  same  hand,  as  in  signa- 
ture inquiries,  should  mainly  be  based  upon  comparisons 
with  writings  of  the  same  class,  but  a  conclusion  that 
two  sets  of  writings  are  by  the  same  writer,  as  in  anony- 
mous letter  cases,  may  be  greatly  enforced  and  con- 
firmed if  writings  produced  under  very  different  condi- 
tions all  show  many  identical  characteristics. 

Unusual  conditions  under  which  signatures  are  writ- 
ten may  affect  their  value  as  standards  of  comparison. 
Hastily  written,  careless  signatures,  like  those  in  ex- 
press or  telegraph  messenger's  books,  for  instance, 
should,  of  course,  not  be  used  exclusively  for  comparison 
with  a  questioned  signature  unless  it  is  supposed  to  have 
been  written  under  similar  conditions  of  haste  and  lack 
of  care. 

The  acceptability  of  standards  may  also  be  affected 
by  the  age  of  the  person  whose  writing  is  in  question 
or  the  age  of  the  writer  when  the  disputed  writing  is  al- 
leged to  have  been  produced.  Handwriting  is  individu- 


22  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

alized  from  the  very  beginning  of  learning  to  write,  but 
such  development  becomes  much  more  pronounced  as 
soon  as  writing  is  used  to  any  considerable  extent  for 
practical  purposes  and  its  distinct  individuality  develops 
much  earlier  with  some  writers  than  with  others.  Even 
after  a  writing  becomes  distinctively  individualized  it 
will  gradually  change  in  numerous  particulars,  the  ex- 
tent of  the  change  depending  upon  the  amount  of  writ- 
ing done,  the  occupation,  habits  and  environment  of 
the  writer. 

With  one  who  writes  but  little  and  whose  surround- 
ings continue  the  same,  changes  will  be  but  slowly  de- 
veloped, while  the  writing  of  one  who  writes  much  will 
often  show  a  gradual  but  constant  evolution  in  certain 
particulars  so  that  a  careful  examination  by  dates  will 
show-  the  development,  even  in  a  small  signature,  of 
certain  definite,  permanent  characteristics  which  begin 
at  a  certain  time  and  continue  through  certain  definite 
periods  of  time.  This  chronological  fact  often  becomes 
very  important  in  examining  a  questioned  document 
which  purports  to  have  been  produced  at  some  re- 
mote time.  The  writing  of  a  fraudulent  document  of 
this  character  is  often  modeled  after  writing  of  a  later 
period  and  sometimes  its  spurious  character  may  thus 
be  conclusively  shown. 

The  most  significant  form  characteristics  of  pencil 
writings  are  in  general  character  the  same  as  those  in 
pen  writings  by  the  same  individual  and  a  questioned 
document  in  pencil  may  properly  be  compared  in  this 
particular  with  pen  wrriting,  but  the  standards  of  com- 
parison in  such  a  case  should,  if  possible,  include  pencil 
writing.  Shading,  pen  pressure,  pen  position  and  line 


STANDARDS   OF   I'O.M  1'AKISON  23 

quality  characteristic's  are  not  exactly  the  same  in  pen 
and  pencil  writing,  hut  such  differences  will  not  render 
one  kind  of  writing  entirely  useless  as  a  proper  standard 
for  comparison  with  the  other,  but  would  tend  to  weaken 
its  value.  Some  writers  make  considerable  distinction 
between  their  pen  and  pencil  writing,  while  others  do  not, 
and  this  fact  also  should  always  be  determined  and  con- 
sidered. 

Pencil  writing  is  usually  produced  with  more  finger 
action  than  pen  writing,  especially  by  one  who  usually 
writes  with  the  arm  motion,  and  a  pencil  is  usually 
grasped  more  firmly  than  a  pen  and,  as  a  rule,  such 
writing  also  requires  more  pressure  on  the  paper,  which 
may  interfere  somewhat  with  free  action.  With  some 
writers,  however,  pencil  writing  is  nearly  always  care- 
less and  rapid  and  much  inferior  to  their  pen  writing. 
It  will  thus  be  seen  that  similarities  between  pen  and 
pencil  writings  may  be  very  significant  as  indicating 
identity,  as  in  anonymous  letter  inquiries,  but  certain 
differences  in  speed,  pen  pressure  or  shading  would  not 
necessarily  be  conclusive  as  indicating  lack  of  identity. 

Physical  conditions  may  affect  the  acceptability  of 
standards.  Many  forgeries  are  committed  in  attempts 
to  obtain  the  property  of  those  who  were  advanced  in 
years  at  the  time  it  is  alleged  the  writing  in  dispute  was 
done,  and  sometimes  sickness  or  weakness  through  age 
during  a  certain  definite  period  of  time  may  affect  such 
aged  writers  so  as  to  render  writings  made  before  or 
after  a  certain  definite  date  improper  and  undesirable 
as  exclusive  standards  of  comparison.  Signatures  pro- 
duced during  a  period  of  great  weakness  would,  of 
course,  not  be  proper  for  exclusive  comparison  with 


24  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

writing  at  a  subsequent  period  under  normal  conditions. 

If  questioned  writing  purports  to  be  by  an  aged 
writer  it  is  especially  desirable  that  the  standards  should 
not  only  be  near  the  date  of  the  writing  in  question,  but 
it  should  also,  if  possible,  be  shown  that  they  were  writ- 
ten under  similar  health  conditions.  A  severe  illness 
may  so  affect  an  aged  writer  as  to  render  all  previous 
signatures  improper  as  standards  of  comparison  with  a 
later  writing  unless  this  fact  is  understood  and  given 
due  consideration. 

It  is  sometimes  found  that  a  signature  to  a  fraudulent 
document,  bearing  a  date  of  a  number  of  years  previous, 
may  not  accord  with  the  physical  condition  of  the  writer 
on  the  date  it  bears.  It  can  sometimes  be  definitely 
shown  that  on  the  exact  date  of  a  disputed  document  the 
alleged  writer  not  only  did  not  write,  but  was  physically 
unable  to  do  so.  This  subject  is  further  discussed  in  the 
chapter  on  variation  in  genuine  writing. 

Request  writings  and  forced  writings  are  not  usually 
the  best  standards  of  comparison,  but  may  be  of  very 
great  value  where  writings  serve  to  identify  a  person, 
this  being  especially  true  with  illiterate  persons  and  those 
unaccustomed  to  writing.  If  circumstances  are  favor- 
able suspected  anonymous  letter  writers,  or  those  who 
deny  any  writing  of  considerable  length,  should  some- 
times be  asked  to  write  the  disputed  matter  from  dic- 
tation or  typewritten  copy  under  as  nearly  as  possible 
the  same  conditions  as  those  under  which  it  is  alleged  or 
suspected  that  it  was  produced.  The  same  kind  of  pencil 
or  pen  should  be  used  and  also  paper  of  the  same  size, 
ruling  and  quality.  Such  writing  should,  if  possible,  be 
obtained  in  such  maner  that  it  is  not  strained,  unnatural 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  25 

and  self-conscious.  If  considerable  writing  is  done  and 
included  in  it  is  all  or  part  of  the  disputed  writing,  some 
of  such  writing  is  quite  certain  to  be  in  a  natural  style. 
Innocent  parties  do  not  often  object  to  furnishing  speci- 
mens of  their  writing  and  suspected  parties  may  not 
dare  to  refuse  or,  as  is  very  frequently  the  case,  may 
be  entirely  unconscious  of  the  fact  that  their  writing  is 
full  of  peculiar  individual  characteristics. 

It  is  sometimes  a  good  plan  to  incorporate  into  such 
request  writing  matter  apparently  on  some  outside  sub- 
ject, but  including  words,  expressions,  letters,  names 
and  combinations  that  are  found  in  the  questioned  writ- 
ing. Under  these  conditions  a  writer  is  more  apt  to  write 
in  a  natural  way  the  matter  in  question  than  if  he  is 
asked  to  write  that  alone.  A  small  amount  of  writing 
produced  by  anyone  when  the  question  of  writing  is  in 
the  mind,  is  apt  to  be  somewhat  self-conscious  and  un- 
natural so  that  a  larger  quantity  should  be  written  to 
overcome  this  difficulty. 

If  it  appears  that  the  writer  is  endeavoring  to  write 
a  disguised  hand,  the  same  matter  should  be  dictated 
twice  and  written  on  different  papers,  and  matter  should 
be  dictated  that  is  not  understood  by  the  writer,  which 
matter  may  be  joined  with  simple  words  or  letters  and 
figures  which  can  be  written  rapidly  and  will  be  more 
likely  to  be  written  freely. 

Depositors'  bank  signatures  are  in  many  instances 
the  most  undesirable  standards  with  which  to  compare 
a  questioned  writing  because  of  the  conditions  under 
which  the  signatures  are  usually  written.  Such  writ- 
ing is  often  done  while  the  writer  is  standing  and  with 
a  strange  pen  and  in  an  unaccustomed  place,  and  former- 


26 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


ly  such  signatures  were  written  in  a  big  book  and  now 
are  usually  put  on  a  small  card.  But  what  is  frequently 
more  disturbing  than  these  conditions  is  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  fact  that  the  signature  is  being  written 
to  be  used  for  comparison,  which,  with  many  writers,  as 
stated  above,  tends  to  produce  a  self-conscious,  unnat- 
ural signature.  With  only  one  such  signature  for  com- 
parison it  is  not  strange  that  forged  papers  may  be  paid 
at  a  bank  when  handwriting  comparison  alone  must  be 
depended  upon. 

A  change  should  be  made  in  the  method  of  securing 
such  signatures  for  comparison  and  with  inactive  ac- 
counts they  should  undoubtedly  be  renewed  from  time 
to  time,  particularly  with  old  people,  and  with  such  ac- 
counts more  than  one  signature  should  always  be  pro- 
cured and  kept  for  comparison.  Two  paid  checks  or 
vouchers,  drawn  in  the  ordinary  course  of  business, 
would  serve  very  much  better  as  standards  than  those 
usually  employed.  Decisions  on  handwriting,  with  most 
unfortunate  results,  are  made  by  bankers  on  standards 
of  comparison  that  would  be  considered  inadequate  by 
the  most  competent  and  experienced  handwriting 
examiners. 

Standards  of  comparison  offered  in  court  should  be 
carefully  scrutinized  throughout  by  one  capable  of  mak- 
ing such  an  examination  in  order  to  discover  possible 
forgeries  offered  as  standards  and  also  to  see  if  such 
proposed  standards  show  evidences  of  retouching,  tamp- 
ering or  changes  of  any  kind  which  the  signatures  may 
not  have  contained  as  originally  written.  The  attempt 
may  be  made  to  introduce  as  standards,  not  only  addi- 
tional forgeries  by  which  to  prove  forgeries,  but  genuine 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  27 

signatures  which  have  been  fraudulently  changed  to 
make  them  conform  to  the  signature  of  a  disputed 
document. 

These  changes  in  genuine  signatures  may  be  made 
by  actually  erasing  by  chemicals  or  by  abrasion  por- 
tions of  a  genuine  signature  and  then  restoring  the  parts 
in  the  manner  desired,  or  may  be  the  retouching  and 
patching  of  undoubtedly  genuine  signatures  in  order  to 
explain  and  excuse  such  retouching  in  a  disputed  writ- 
ing. Fortunately  such  evidences  of  erasures  and  re- 
touching done  at  a  different  time  and  by  a  different 
hand  are,  as  a  rule,  perfectly  evident  when  carefully 
examined.  The  line  or  pen  strokes  composing  such  sig- 
natures should  be  carefully  examined  throughout  with 
the  microscope  in  good  light,  and  suspicious  signatures 
should  be  objected  to  by  counsel  and  excluded  by  the 
court.  With  an  attorney  fairly  alert  and  reasonably 
well  qualified  on  the  subject  no  abuse  on  this  score  need 
be  feared. 

The  question  as  to  what  are  proper  and  adequate 
standards  of  comparison  may  arise  in  the  consideration 
of  certain  so-called  tests  which  are  sometimes  proposed 
in  connection  with  handwriting  testimony.  Unfor- 
tunately such  tests  are  in  some  instances  manifestly  un- 
fair and  their  sole  purpose  is  thus  to  divert  attention 
from  the  main  facts  and  destroy  the  effect  of  damag- 
ing testimony.  No  competent  and  honest  witness  will 
refuse  to  submit  to  a  fair  test  and  no  witness  should  be 
compelled  to  submit  to  a  test  that  is  not  fair. 

The  inquiry  is  sometimes  made  whether  several  test 
signatures  or  words  on  a  sheet  were  written  by  one,  two 
or  more  writers.  This  at  first  may  seem  like  a  proper 


28  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

question  and  an  answer  may  be  insisted  upon,  but  there 
may  be  and  usually  is  no  suitable  basis  for  an  opinion  in 
such  an  inquiry  on  account  of  the  lack  of  proper  and 
sufficient  standards.  A  competent  and  experienced  ex- 
aminer will  not  give  a  positive  opinion  in  any  such  mat- 
ter until  comparison  can  be  made  with  a  sufficient  quan- 
tity of  standard  writing,  unless,  as  may  be  the  case,  the 
existing  fact  is  perfectly  evident  by  a  mere  inspection. 

If,  however,  a  witness  has  given  a  positive  opinion 
on  the  main  question  in  dispute  based  on  an  equally 
slender  foundation,  as  unfortunately  may  be  the  case 
with  the  presumptuous  or  the  inexperienced,  then  a  test 
which  is  really  parallel  in  character  to  the  original  in- 
quiry, may  be  entirely  proper  and  allowable.  Much  of 
the  discredit  that  has  been  brought  upon  handwriting 
testimony  has  resulted  from  rash  attempts  to  give 
opinions  in  the  absence  of  proper  standards.  This  un- 
fortunate practice  is  undoubtedly  due,  in  a  measure,  to 
the  bank  custom,  already  referred  to,  of  keeping  only 
one  signature  for  handwriting  comparison. 

Writing  characteristics  of  any  handwriting  as  deter- 
mined and  classified  in  a  thorough  examination  are,  ( 1 ) 
permanent,  or  fixed,  (2)  usual  or  common,  (3)  occa- 
sional, and  (4)  exceptional  or  accidental.  It  therefore 
follows  that  a  handwriting  has  a  certain  field  of  possible 
and  expected  variation  and  without  a  sufficient  quantity 
of  standard  writing  significant  habits  cannot  be  deter- 
mined, and  the  value  and  force  of  characteristics  cannot 
be  definitely  known.  It  is  usually  through  ignorance, 
but  sometimes  through  pretension,  that  the  attempt  is 
voluntarily  made  to  differentiate  the  various  signatures 
of  a  specially  prepared  test  group,  as  described  above, 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  29 

with  no  other  standards  for  comparison  than  the  various 
signatures  themselves.  All  of  such  signatures  may  be 
disguised  and  they  are  quite  likely  to  be  unnatural  and 
may  be  simulated  from  one  model,  and  with  no  fixed 
habits  and  characteristics  for  comparison  it  can  easily  be 
seen  what  presumption  it  may  be  to  give  any  opinion 
whatever.  The  case  is  not  at  all  parallel  with  the  com- 
parison of  a  disputed  writing  with  a  sufficient  quantity 
of  proved,  genuine  writings  or  an  adequate  number  of 
naturally  wrritten,  genuine  signatures. 

In  such  inquiries  the  fact  should  always  be  brought 
out  and  emphasized  that  tests  to  be  fair  and  of  value 
must  be  parallel  in  nature  with  the  main  question  at  is- 
sue. Because  one  signature  is  pronounced  a  forgery  it 
is  not  to  be  assumed  that  any  forgery,  no  matter  how 
skillfully  executed,  should  necessarily  be  discovered  at 
sight  or  even  by  study.  Like  counterfeits  of  any  kind 
they  may  be  good  enough  to  deceive  the  most  skillful, 
but  this  does  not  prove  that  a  bungling  forgery  is  genu- 
ine nor  does  it  follow  that  if  a  definite  opinion  can  be 
given  in  one  case  it  must  be  in  the  other. 

To  insist  on  a  positive  opinion  under  any  test  is  say- 
ing, in  effect,  that  one  who  is  not  able  and  willing  to 
answer  correctly  every  question  or  solve  every  problem 
is  therefore  not  qualified  to  answer  any  question  or  solve 
any  problem.  Such  a  method  of  proving  either  com- 
petency or  incompetency  would  not  be  permitted  in  any 
properly  conducted  scientific  inquiry.  The  competent 
man  in  any  field  of  inquiry  does  not  hesitate  to  acknowl- 
edge his  limitations  and  he  should  not  be  forced  to  do 
that  which  he  does  not  assume  to  be  able  to  do. 

If  the  pretender  or  the  unskilled  witness  presumes  to 


30  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

give  opinions  offhand  and  without  a  proper  and  ade- 
quate foundation,  as  unfortunately  is  sometimes  the 
case,  it  is  right  and  proper  that  such  ignorance  and  pre- 
tension should  be  exposed  by  proper  tests  similar  in 
character  to  the  main  inquiry.  Often  such  witnesses 
are  utterly  unable  to  separate  the  actual  signature  in  dis- 
pute from  the  genuine  signatures  in  the  case  when  all 
are  presented  in  the  form  of  photographs,  especially  if 
the  size  of  the  signatures  has  been  somewhat  changed. 

Some  of  those  who  testify  from  recollection  and 
pretend  to  "know  a  handwriting"  will  often  make  the 
most  absurd  errors  on  the  simplest  tests.  They  not  only 
cannot  pick  out  the  disputed  signature  when  all  are 
photographed,  but  in  many  instances  actually  cannot 
distinguish  the  very  writing  in  question  in  the  case  from 
the  standard  signatures,  if  the  signatures  are  mixed  up 
and  shown  out  of  their  connection  with  other  matter 
or  in  irregular  order.  Such  practical  tests  are  perfectly 
proper  and  may  show  most  conclusively  the  unreliable 
character  of  such  testimony. 

Just  a  further  word  is  added  to  this  chapter  regard- 
ing the  long  discussion,  in  fact  covering  several 
centuries,  of  what  in  legal  phrase  was  known  as  "com- 
parison of  hands."  The  point  at  issue  first  was  whether 
any  comparison  of  any  kind  in  a  legal  contention  would 
be  permitted,  and  later,  as  we  have  seen,  the  question 
arose  as  to  the  admission  of  genuine  writings  for  pur- 
poses of  comparison.  The  fact  that  in  early  days  only 
an  occasional  juryman  could  read  and  write  no  doubt 
had  an  important  bearing  on  the  subject.  Many  of  the 
old  practices  are  now  as  obsolete  as  "Benefit  of  Clergy" 
or  indictments  for  witchcraft. 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  31 

Some  knowledge  of  the  ancient  discussion  is  neces- 
sary to  a  full  understanding  of  some  of  the  later  rulings 
on  the  subject.  For  instance,  one  of  the  reasons  at  first 
for  objecting  to  the  admission  of  writings  for  compari- 
son was  that  under  the  still  older  law  any  comparison 
whatever  was  deemed  improper,  and  the  influence  of 
this  old  rule  can  be  traced  through  the  decisions  long 
after  the  rule  itself  was  changed. 

Incident  to  the  long  struggle  to  get  genuine  writings 
admitted  for  comparison  in  handwriting  cases  numerous 
queer  arguments  were  developed.  For  nearly  seventy- 
five  years  now  one  of  these  has  trickled  down  through 
the  decisions,  which,  in  brief,  is  the  contention  that  in 
making  a  comparison  "recollection"  of  a  handwriting 
is  more  to  be  depended  upon  than  the  most  thorough 
and  extended  study  and  direct  comparison  of  the  dis- 
puted writing  with  any  number  of  genuine  examples. 

It  is  not  probable  that  the  same  argument  would  be 
seriously  applied  to  anything  else  under  heaven,  but  in 
solemn  legal  form  it  has  been  made  to  apply  to  hand- 
writing. The  peculiar  doctrine  is  now  nearly  obsolete, 
but  still  appears  now  and  then  in  some  opinion  or  some 
text-book  that  harks  back  to  the  old  precedents. 

Mr.  Justice  Coleridge,  of  the  King's  Bench,  is  in 
great  measure  responsible  for  the  emphasis  on  this  rea- 
soning which  was  definitely  formulated  in  1836,  not 
directly  on  this  particular  subject  but  in  an  argument 
to  show  that  standard  writings  should  not  under  any 
conditions  be  admitted  for  comparison.  The  case  was 
Doe  d.  Mudd  vs.  Suckermore  (5  Ad.  &  El.  705)  and,  as 
the  title  of  the  case  would  seem  to  suggest,  the  opinion 
has  not  tended  to  clarify  the  stream  of  justice. 


32  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

As  part  of  this  argument  against  the  admission  of 
standard  writings,  and  mainly  for  the  purpose  of  show- 
ing that  they  were  not  necessary  or  desirable,  the 
opinion  vaguely  says:  "The  test  of  genuineness  ought 
to  be  the  general  resemblance,  not  to  the  formation  of 
the  letters  in  some  other  specimen  or  specimens,  but  to 
the  general  character  of  the  writing." 

The  contention  in  simpler  words  seems  to  be  that  such 
judgments  must  depend  upon  an  impression  of  a  hand- 
writing as  a  whole  and  a  certain  indescribable  intuition 
that  excludes  all  analysis  and  necessarily  jumps  to  a  con- 
clusion. Few  things  are  more  misleading  or  deceptive 
than  general  resemblance  or  "general  character"  in  writ- 
ing and  nearly  all  errors  in  such  examinations  are,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  made  by  those  who  literally  follow  this 
improper  method.  This  vague  and  fallacious  argument, 
however,  has  been  quoted  with  approval  in  scores  of 
legal  opinions. 

Even  before  the  date  of  this  decision  the  weakness  of 
the  argument,  then  under  discussion  in  the  courts  of  this 
country  and  England,  was  pointed  out  in  Lyon  vs.  Ly- 
man,  9  Conn.  55  (1831),  by  an  able  Connecticut  judge 
who,  on  an  appeal  to  set  aside  a  verdict  because  writings 
had  actually  been  compared  by  a  witness,  disposes  of 
what  he  calls  the  "feeble  objection"  in  these  sensible 
words : 

"The  first  class  of  witnesses  had  seen  the  defendant 
write.  They  believed  it  to  be  his  handwriting;  but  on 
cross-examination,  they  said  they  did  not  know  that  they 
were  sufficiently  acquainted  with  it  to  determine  it  to  be 
his,  except  by  comparing  it  with  the  writings  proved  to 
be  genuine.  Surely,  the  objection  here  was  entirely  to 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  33 

the  weight  of  their  testimony  and  not  to  its  admissibility. 
A  fair  paraphrase  of  their  testimony  is,  that  they 
believed  it  to  be  his  handwriting  from  having  seen  him 
write.  This,  according  to  the  second  position,  would 
render  the  testimony  admissible.  But  they  knew  it  to 
be  his,  by  comparing  it  with  his  other  writings  .  .  . 

"But  I  forbear.  It  has  always  appeared  to  be  a  very 
feeble  objection;  and  I  rejoice  to  see  it  overruled.  The 
motion  ought  to  be  denied." 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  author  of  this  opinion 
was  not  then  a  judge  of  England's  highest  court. 

Many  text  writers  and  many  judges  have  from  the 
first  refused  to  follow  Mr.  Justice  Coleridge  and  have 
spoken  in  plain  terms  on  the  question1,  but  the  rule  laid 


.  Wigmore,  already  quoted  at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter, 
closes  his  able  discussion  of  the  questions  of  "comparison  of  hands" 
and  admission  of  standard  writings,  as  follows: 

The  argument  of  Mr.  Justice  Coleridge  that  "the  English  law  has 
no  provisions  for  regulating  the  manner  of  conducting  the  inquiry" 
illustrates  that  perverse  disposition  of  the  Angle-Saxon  judge  —  the 
despair  of  the  jurist  —  to  tie  his  own  hands  in  the  administration  of 
justice,  to  deny  himself,  by  a  submission  to  self-created  bonds,  that 
power  of  helping  the  good  and  preventing  the  bad  which  an  untechni- 
cal  common  sense  would  never  hesitate  to  exercise.  The  enlightened 
procedure  on  this  subject  is  that  which  had  subsequently  been  intro- 
duced in  England  by  the  statute  of  1854,  that  which  the  Court  of 
Massachusetts  had  already  adopted  from  the  beginning  and  that  which 
now  prevails  by  statute  in  many  of  our  jurisdictions,  namely,  the 
method  of  addressing  all  evidence  of  genuineness  [of  standards]  to  the 
judge  and  of  leaving  the  control  of  its  length,  its  quality,  and  its  effect 
to  the  trial  judge's  discretion.  —  Wigmore  on  Evidence,  Vol.  III.  Sec. 
2000  (1904). 

An  admirable  example  of  the  absurdity  to  which  the  admission 
of  knowledge  evidence  at  the  same  time  with  the  exclusion  of  com- 
parison evidence,  has  led  is  shown  in  the  case  of  Smith  v.  Sainsbury 
(1832)  5  Car.  &  P.  196;  the  court  implying  (something  that  it  could 
not  believe)  that  greater  certainty  could  be  obtained  by  evidence  from 
the  shadowy  standard  in  the  witness's  mind,  than  from  actual  juxta- 
position. —  L.  R.  A.  Note,  62  L.  R.  A.  818  by  L.  B.  B.  (1904). 

It  would  seem  as  if  the  following  discussion  of  the  matter  from  a 
leading  Minnesota  case  would  be  conclusive: 

In  general,  and  from  necessity,  the  authenticity  of  handwriting  must 
be  subject  to  proof  by  comparison  of  some  sort,  or  by  testimony 
which  is  based  upon  comparison,  between  the  writing  in  question 


34  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

down  in  Mudd  vs.  Suckennore  continued  in  force  in 
England  till  1854,  and  in  this  country  generally  till  late 
in  the  last  century  and,  as  we  have  already  seen,  is  still 
the  law  in  numerous  states  and  the  question  as  to  whether 
it  is  preferable,  all  things  considered,  to  prove  writings 


and  that  which  is  in  some  manner  recognized  or  shown  to  be  genuine. 
This  is  everywhere  allowed,  through  the  opinions  of  witnesses  who 
have  acquired  a  knowledge,  more  or  less  complete,  of  the  handwrit- 
ing of  a  person,  as  by  having  seen  him  write  or  from  acquaintance 
with  papers  authenticated  as  genuine.  In  such  cases  the  conception 
of  the  handwriting  retained  in  the  mind  of  the  witness  becomes  a 
standard  for  comparison,  by  reference  to  which  his  opinion  is  formed, 
and  given  in  evidence.  It  would  seem  that  a  standard  generally  not 
less  satisfactory,  and  very  often  much  more  satisfactory,  is  afforded 
by  the  opportunity  for  examining,  side  by  side,  the  writing  in  dispute 
and  other  writings  of  unquestioned  authenticity;  and,  this,  we  think 
is  in  accordance  with  the  common  judgment  and  experience  of  men. — 
Morrison  vs.  Porter,  35  Minn.  435.  Dickinson,  J.  (1886). 

In  many  cases  it  is  more  satisfactory  to  allow  a  witness  to  com- 
pare the  writing  in  issue  with  other  writings  of  unquestioned  authority 
as  to  genuineness,  than  to  compare  it  with  the  standard  which  he 
may  have  formed  or  retained  in  his  mind  from  a  knowledge  of  the 
party's  handwriting. — Green  vs.  Terwilleger,  56  Fed-  384  (1892). 

Abstractly  reasoning  upon  this  kind  of  proof  it  seems  plain  that 
a  more  correct  judgment  as  to  the  identity  of  handwriting  would  be 
formed  by  a  witness  by  a  critical  and  minute  comparison  with  a  fair 
and  genuine  specimen  of  the  party's  handwriting,  than  by  a  com- 
parison of  seen  signatures  with  the  faint  impression  produced  by  hav- 
ing seen  the  party  write,  and  even  then,  perhaps,  under  circumstances 
which  did  not  awaken  his  attention;  hence  the  greater  necessity  for 
such  a  standard,  as  without  it  no  possible  legal  conclusion  could  be 
reached. — Reid  vs.  Warner,  17  L.  C.  Rep.  485  (1867). 

I  think  in  all  the  cases  where  little  weight  is  recommended  to  be 
given  to  the  opinion  of  experts  of  handwriting,  a  clear  distinction  is 
to  be  drawn  between  the  mere  opinion  of  the  witness  and  the  assist- 
ance he  may  afford  by  pointing  to  the  marks,  indications  and  char- 
acters in  the  writings  themselves,  upon  which  the  opinion  is  based, 
and  that  the  caution  applies  to  cases  where  opinions  conflict  and  the 
alleged  forgery  is  admittedly  executed  with  great  skill,  and  the  detec- 
tion is  unquestionably  difficult. — 19  Nova  Scotia  279  (1886). 

No  clearer  and  more  effective  discussion  of  the  subject  has  ap- 
peared than  that  of  Hon.  Edward  Twistleton  in  the  great  work  on  the 
Junius  Letters.  He  says: 

"Comparison  of  handwritings,  as  an  instrument  for  ascertaining 
who  is  the  handwriter  of  a  disputed  document,  seems  very  superior 
to  the  declaration  of  a  witness  as  to  his  belief,  however  familiar  he 
may  be  with  the  hand  of  the  supposed  writer.  If  there  are  sufficient 
materials  for  comparison,  this  superiority  is  great,  even  when  there  is 


STANDARDS  OF  COMPARISON  35 

by  recollection  or  by  using  standards,  is  actually  still 
under  discussion. 

This  question  of  general  appearance  or  "general  char- 
acter" in  handwriting  is  treated  more  at  length  in  a 
subsequent  chapter  on  individual  and  general  character- 
istics of  writing  and  also  in  the  chapter  on  simulated 
forgeries. 


no  disguise;  and  in  the  case  of  a  really  good  disguise,  the  superiority 
is  overwhelming. 

"A  witness  who  declares  such  belief  can  only  form  his  opinion  from 
comparison;  but  one  of  the  terms  of  the1  comparison  is  withdrawn 
from  the  knowledge  of  others.  That  term  of  comparison  exists  simply 
in  the  memory  of  the  witness,  who  has  the  type  of  a  particular  hand- 
writing present  to  his  mind.  But  the  value  of  this  type  depends  wholly 
upon  the  correctness  of  his  original  observations,  and  on  the  accuracy 
of  his  memory.  Unless  he  has  previously  studied  a  handwriting  for 
the  express  purpose  of  comparison,  his  conclusions  can  scarcely  ever 
be  more  than  a  strong  mental  impression  of  resemblance.  For  others, 
his  opinion  derives  all  its  value  from  authority.  He  cannot  go  through 
ythe  proofs  of  what  he  asserts;  others  cannot  see  what  he  thinks  he 
'sees  in  his  mind's  eye;  and,  if  he  has  made  a  mistake  in  his  type,  his 
error  cannot  be  proved  to  exist-  Moreover,  if  he  has  to  deal  with  a 
thoroughly  well  disguised  hand,  the  general  type  in  his  mind  ceases 
to  have  much  value. 

"The  case  is  very  different  in  the  comparison  of  documents  pre- 
sented to  the  eyes  of  those  who  are  to  judge  respecting  them.  Here 
they  know  both  the  terms  of  the  comparison.  Ultimately,  their  con- 
clusions need  not  rest  upon  authority  at  all.  A  general  expert  in  hand- 
writing may  point  out  coincidences  in  documents  which  a  volunteer 
would  not  have  observed,  if  the  documents  had  been  in  his  posses- 
sion during  a  long  series  of  years;  but  those  coincidences  are  out- 
ward objective  facts,  the  common  property  of  experts  and  volunteers. 
"If  the  expert  has  skill  in  analyzing  his  own  impressions,  he  can 
go  through  the  proofs  of  everything  which  he  asserts  and  can  make 
others  see  what  he  sees.  If  he  makes  a  mistake,  his  error  admits 
of  proof.  Hence  the  case  with  which  he  deals,  however  complicated, 
becomes  merely  one  of  reasoning,  in  which  internal  circumstantial 
evidence  is  applied  to  demonstrate  a  disputed  fact." — Hon.  Edward 
Twistleton  in  Handwriting  of  Junius,  pp  Ixi,  Ixii  (1871). 


CHAPTER  IV. 

PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS1. 

Photographs  are  useful  in  nearly  every  questioned 
document  investigation,  and  in  many  cases  it  is  impos- 
sible without  them  to  present  the  facts  to  a  court  and 
jury  in  an  effective,  convincing  manner.  In  such  an 
inquiry  a  tangible  thing  is  under  examination  for  the 
purpose  of  determining  which  of  two  conflicting  in- 
terpretations is  the  correct  one,  and  if  the  investigation 
is  to  be  thorough  and  complete,  certain  instruments  and 
illustrations  are  necessary  to  bring  into  view  and  make 
plain  and  clear  the  physical  facts  which  constitute  the 
evidence  upon  which  the  final  conclusion  is  based.  The 
photographic  camera  is  one  of  these  instruments. 

Photographs  often  make  clear  what  may  otherwise 
be  hidden  or  indistinct  and  this  alone  is  sufficient  reason 
for  their  use.  In  many  different  ways  they  are  helpful; 
and  some  of  the  various  uses  are  here  described  and  some 
technical  directions  are  given  for  the  most  effective 
illustration  of  a  few  of  the  numerous  questions  that  may 
arise  regarding  disputed  documents. 

In  the  first  place  every  questioned  document  should 
be  promptly  photographed  in  order  that  a  correct  and 
permanent  record  may  be  made  of  it  and  its  condition. 

1(rhis  chapter,  in  part,  first  appeared  in  The  Albany  Law  Journal, 
Vol.  63,  No.  7,  and  is  reprinted  here  by  permission.  Up  to  the  date  of 
its  recent  discontinuance  The  Albany  Law  Journal  was  the  oldest  law 
publication  in  America.  Complete  files  covering-  its  long-  history  are 
to  be  found  in  the  leading-  law  libraries. 

[36] 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         37 

The  photographic  record  may  be  of  great  value  in  case 
of  loss  or  mutilation  of  the  original  document  or  in  the 
event  of  any  fraudulent  or  accidental  changes  being 
made  in  it  or  of  any  changes  due  to  natural  causes. 

Photographs  should  also  be  made  of  disputed  docu- 
ments for  the  more  important  reason  that  they  may  be 
of  great  assistance  in  showing  the  fraudulent  character 
of  the  papers,  or  on  the  contrary  may  be  of  distinct  value 
in  establishing  the  genuineness  of  documents  wrongfully 
attacked. 

Those  especially  who  question  the  genuineness  of  a 
paper  should  insist  on  their  right  to  photograph  it  and 
if  the  request  is  refused  a  petition  to  the  proper  tribunal 
for  an  order  should  be  promptly  made.  Nor  should 
the  parties  who  do  not  have  possession  of  a  document 
be  compelled  to  accept  unsuitable  photographs  made  by 
the  opposing  parties,  but  they  should  insist  on  having 
the  photographing  done  satisfactorily. 

It  is  sometimes  contended  by  those  who  object  to 
photographs  that  in  some  way  they  supplant  the  original 
document  in  dispute  and  serve  as  a  sole  basis  for  a  final 
conclusion.  This  is,  of  course,  not  the  fact,  for  their 
purpose  is  to  illustrate,  test  and  interpret  the  original, 
and  with  their  aid  this  is  done  without  danger  of  injuring 
or  entirely  destroying  it. 

Even  with  the  utmost  care  a  disputed  paper  seldom 
goes  through  a  protracted  trial  without  being  soiled, 
torn  and  broken  and  if  the  original  document  itself  and 
it  alone  is  to  be  handled,  tested,  measured  and  examined 
by  court,  jury  and  witnesses  day  after  day,  it  is  almost 
certain  to  be  so  defaced  and  injured  that  finally  it  may 


38  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

be  difficult  to  determine  from  the  paper  itself  whether 
it  is  genuine  or  not. 

The  ways  in  which  photographs  may  be  helpful  and 
illuminating  in  questioned  document  investigations  are 
so  numerous  that  only  the  more  important  are  here 
described. 

The  most  important  reason  for  making  photographs 
of  a  disputed  document  is  because  by  this  means  the  writ- 
ing in  question  can  be  accurately  enlarged  so  that  every 
characteristic  can  be  clearly  and  properly  interpreted 
whether  the  facts  so  shown  point  to  genuineness  or  to 
fraud.  Writing  in  natural  size  is,  in  most  instances,  too 
small  for  critical  study  and  even  a  slight  enlargment  is 
often  of  great  assistance  in  showing  the  facts.  In  some 
inquiries  the  facts  can  be  successfully  denied  if  they 
are  not  shown  by  properly  made  enlarged  photographs.1 

Another  purpose  in  photographing  a  document  is  by 
this  means  to  provide  any  number  of  perfectly  accurate 

1We  have  ourselves  been  able  to  compare  these  signatures  by 
means  of  photographic  copies  and  fully  concur  (from  evidence  "oculis 
subjecta  fidelibus")  that  the  seal  and  the  signature  of  Pico  on  this 
instrument  are  forgeries. — Luco  vs.  U.  S.,  23  Howard  (1859). 

The  magnified  photographic  copies  of  the  genuine  signatures  of 
the  defendant,  and  of  the  disputed  signature,  which  was  submitted 
to  the  inspection  of  the  jury,  were,  we  think,  in  connection  with  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Southworth,  admissible  in  evidence.  It  is  not  dis- 
similar to  the  examination  with  a  magnifying  glass.  Proportions  are 
so  enlarged  thereby  to  the  vision,  that  faint  lines  and  marks,  as  well 
as  the  genuine  characteristics  of  handwriting  which  perhaps  could 
not  otherwise  be  clearly  discerned  and  appreciated,  are  thus  disclosed 
to  observation  and  afford  additional  and  useful  means  of  making  com- 
parisons between  admitted  signatures  and  one  which  is  alleged  to 
be  only  an  imitation. — Marcy  vs.  Barnes,  16  Gray,  Mass.  161  (1860). 

The  administration  of  justice  profits  by  the  progress  of  science, 
and  its  history  shows  it  to  have  been  almost  the  earliest  in  antagonism 
to  popular  delusions  and  superstitions.  The  revelations  of  the  micro- 
scope are  constantly  resorted  to,  in  protection  of  individual  and  public 
interests.  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  any  reason  why,  in  a  court  of 
justice,  a  different  rule  of  evidence  should  exist,  in  respect  to  the 
magnified  image,  presented  in  the  lens  in  the  photographer's  camera, 
and  permanently  delineated  upon  the  sensitive  paper.  Either  may  be 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         39 

reproductions  of  it,  thus  affording  unlimited  opportun- 
ity for  study,  comparison  and  investigation  by  any  num- 
ber of  examiners,  which  would  not  be  possible  by  using 
the  original  paper  alone.  Photographic  duplicates  also 
enable  court  and  jury  to  see,  understand  and  weigh  testi- 

distorted  or  erroneous  through  imperfect  instruments  or  manipula- 
tion, but  that  would  be  apparent  or  easily  proved.  If  they  are  relied 
upon  as  agencies,  for  accurate  mathematical  results  in  mensuration 
and  astronomy,  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  be  deemed  unre- 
liable in  matters  of  evidenc.  Wherever  what  they  disclose  can  aid  or 
elucidate  the  just  determination  of  legal  controversies,  there  can  be 
no  well  formed  objection  to  resorting  to  them. — Frank  vs.  Chemical 
Nat.  Bank,  5  Jones  &  S.,  26  N.  Y.  Sup.  Ct.  (1874),  aft.  84  N.  Y.  209. 

Enlarged  copies  of  a  disputed  signature  or  writing,  and  of  those 
used  as  comparisons,  may  be  of  -great  aid  to  a  jury  in  comparing 
and  examining  different  specimens  of  one's  handwriting.  Charac- 
teristics of  it  may  be  brought  out  and  made  clear  by  the  aid  of  a 
photograph  or  magnifying  glass  which  would  not  be  discernible  by 
the  naked  eye.  As  well  object  to  the  use  of  an  eye-glass  by  one  whose 
vision  is  defective. — Rowell  vs.  Fuller,  59  Vt.  688  (1887). 

Enlarged  photograph  copies  proven  to  have  been  correctly  made, 

of  the  will  and  of  the  signatures  of  Philinda  Terwilliger 

were  admitted  in  evidence.  These  copies  were  of  great  assistance  and 
value  to  counsel  in  their  arguments  and  have  materially  aided  the 
court  in  its  investigation  in  comparing  and  examining  the  different 
specimens  of  handwriting  exhibited  in  the  original  document. — Green 
vs.  Terwilliger,  56  Fed.  Rep.  384  (1892). 

The  mere  momentary  enlargement  of  the  signatures  one  by  one 
by  each  juror  for  himself  with  the  aid  of  a  magnifying  glass,  giving  dif- 
ferent effects  according  to  the  place  where  he  holds  the  glass,  must 
be  regarded  as  a  poor  substitute  for  the  permanent  enlargement  of 
all  the  signatures  alike  by  magnified  copies  which  are  the  same  to 
all  the  jurors  and  do  not  vary  on  different  examinations. — Editorial 
Comment  by  "B.  A.  R.,"  in  L.  R.  A.,  35:813  (1897). 

The  defense  caused  the  signature  of  Governor  Armijo  to  the  al- 
leged grant  and  one  existing  on  one  of  the  documents  offered  as  a 
standard  of  comparison,  to  be  photographically  enlarged.  After  prov- 
ing by  the  photographer  by  whom  the  photographs  were  made  the 
accuracy  of  the  method  pursued  and  the  results  obtained  by  him,  the 
enlarged  photographs  were  tendered  and  were  admitted  in  evidence 
over  objection.  The  ruling  was  correct. — U.  S.  vs.  Ortis,  176  U.  S. 
Supreme  Court  (1899). 

Appellees  had  the  signature  in  contest  and  two  other  signatures 
of  the  testator,  one  at  the  foot  of  a  check,  and  the  one  on  the  back 
of  a  note,  both  clearly  genuine,  enlarged  and  reproduced  by  photog- 
raphy. These  photographs  were  exhibited  to  the  jury  after  proof  by 
the  photographers  of  their  accuracy.  Appellant  complains  of  the  ad- 
mission of  the  photographs.  But  they  were  only  a  more  enduring 
form  of  exhibiting  the  signatures  to  the  jury  as  under  a  magnifying 
glass. — First  National  Bank  vs.  Wisdom's  Ex'rs.  Ill  Ky.,  63  S.  W. 
Rep.  461  (1901). 


40  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

mony  regarding  a  document  as  it  is  being  given,  which 
cannot  be  done  without  such  assistance,  as  all  could  not 
see  the  original  paper  at  the  same  time. 

Another  reason  for  photographing  a  document  is  that 
photographs  can  be  cut  apart  in  any  way  necessary  or 
desirable  and  the  various  parts  classified  for  comparison 
as  cannot  be  done  without  some  means  of  making  ac- 
curate duplicates  of  the  original  paper.  The  real  signifi- 
cance of  many  writing  characteristics  cannot  be  clearly 
understood  until  parts  to  be  compared  are  classified  and 
all  brought  within  the  angle  of  vision. 

Except  in  the  case  of  those  specially  skilled,  the  eye  is 
almost  totally  unable  to  carry  unfamiliar  form  or  color 
impressions,  and  but  very  few  are  able  property  to  note 
even  the  most  conspicuous  resemblances  or  differences 
in  objects  that  cannot  be  examined  close  together1.  Ob- 
jects that  are  really  different  apparently  differ  more 
and  more  the  closer  together  they  are  placed ;  or,  if  simi- 
lar, appear  to  be  more  and  more  alike  as  they  are  brought 
together.  In  showing  dissimilarity  or  identity  in  two 
sets  of  writings  the  cumulative  force  of  such  grouped 
writing  characteristics  is,  in  many  instances,  irresistible. 
The  logical  way  to  determine  whether  things  are  alike 
or  different  is  to  examine  them  side  by  side,  and  photo- 
graphs make  this  possible  in  comparing  writings.  As 

1When  the  original  is  produced,  but  it  is  desired  also  conveniently 
to  collate  specimens  by  photographic  groupings  (as  by  placing  many 
specimens  in  juxtaposition  on  a  single  sheet),  the  original  is  not  liter- 
ally unavailable,  in  the  sense  of  being  tangibly  beyond  procurement. 
Nevertheless  there  are  still  lacking  and  unproduced  to  instantaneous 
perception  the  minute  resemblances  and  differences  which  appear 
upon  close  juxtaposition  and  fade  from  memory  in  the  operation  of 
passing  from  one  document  to  the  others.  Hence  the  photographic 
juxtaposition  does,  in  strict  sense,  "produce"  these  otherwise  unavail- 
able minutiae,  and  such  a  grouping  is  therefore  allowable  without  even 
any  deviation  from  technical  principle. — Wigmore  on  Evidence,  Vol. 
I.  Sec.  797  (1904). 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         41 


FIG.  2 — Document  Camera  on  Special  Stand  in  vertical  position.    Object 
board  removed  and  instrument  arranged  for  photograph- 
ing books  or  any  bulky  objects. 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


r7>-y-z>«-o 


Professor  Wigmore 
so  well  points  out, 
the  original  itself  is 
not  available  for  ex- 
amination, or  rather 
for  the  best  exami- 
nation, until  by 
means  of  photo- 
graphs comparison  is 
made  possible. 

There  are  certain 
microscopic  condi- 
tions in  connection 
with  certain  inquiries 
that  even  cannot  be 
clearly  seen  except 
under  proper  mag- 
nification. Such  facts 
may  be  vital,  and  are 
none  the  less  facts 
notwithstanding 
their  smallness  and 
need  only  to  be  seen 
to  be  appreciated. 
In  jury  cases  particularly  it  is  sometimes  very  dif- 
ficult if  not  entirely  impossible  to  prove  such  conditions 
because  of  the  difficulty  of  showing  them.  Here  again 
photography  renders  great  assistance.  Properly  made 
photo-micrographs  of  such  parts  give  court  and  jury 
in  permanent  form  the  transitory  view  that  can  only 
be  seen  by  one  at  a  time  by  the  use  of  the  microscope. 
Such  enlarged  photographs  are  sometimes  absolutely 


FIG.  3 — Grouped  comparison  of  portions  of 

anonymous  letter  and  standard  letter  by 

suspected  writer,  showing  method  of 

comparison  by  juxtaposition. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         43 

conclusive;  they  are  silent  but  convincing  witnesses  of 
fact  and  not  of  opinion  and  cannot  be  successfully  dis- 
puted. 

Many  other  conditions  may  arise  under  which  pho- 
tography is  useful.  One  of  these  is  the  necessity  of  de- 
ciding whether  a  writing  was  continuously  written  under 

f  n  tbe  presence  of 


FIG.  4— A  chemically  erased  signature  reproduced  by  photography  after  sub- 
jection to  fumes  of  ammonia  sulphide.    Case  of  People  vs.  Alder- 
dice.     Photo,  by  Drummond,  New  York  City. 

the  same  conditions  or  whether  it  contains  an  added 
fraudulent  portion.  The  photographic  lens  and  sensi- 
tized photographic  plate  will  distinguish  and  make 
permanent  record  of  differences  in  tint  that  the  human 
eye  does  not  see  clearly  until  pointed  out  in  this  way. 
A  photograph,  in  such  an  inquiry  as  that  just  described, 
may  thus  be  indispensable  as  a  means  of  pointing  the 
way  to  the  truth.  This  phase  of  photographic  work  is 
discussed  more  at  length  in  the  chapter  on  ink. 

Photographs  may  also  be  useful  in  showing  delicate 
discolor  ations,  due  to  chemical  erasures  or  other  fraudu- 


44 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


lent  changes,  which  otherwise  might  be  overlooked,  de- 
nied or  misinterpreted.  Ordinary  photographic  plates 
render  yellow  tints  as  shades  of  black,  and  as  many  dis- 
colorations  have  a  yellow  tinge,  a  photograph  will  show 
such  conditions  with  great  clearness. 

This  tendency  to  make  black  of  yellow  is  also  of  great 
value  in  photographing  old  and  faded  yellow  writing 
or  writing  made  to  simulate  it.  A  photograph  in  such 
case  reproduces  the  original  with  accuracy  of  form  and 
also  makes  it  more  legible,  thus  giving  an  opportunity 
for  study  and  comparison  that  the  original  does  not 
afford.  In  some  cases  the  indistinctness  of  the  writing 
in  question  is  its  strongest  defense  and  as  soon  as  it  is 
clearly  photographed,  and  especially  if  it  is  suitably 
enlarged,  it  immediately  becomes  vulnerable  from  many 
points.  In  such  cases  photographs  are  not  merely  de- 
sirable; they  are  necessary. 

Photography  is  also  helpful  in  determining  whether 
erasures  by  abrasion  have  been  made  in  a  document.  If 


FIG.  5 — Transmitted  light  photograph  of  portions  of  note  for  three  hundred  thous 

and  dollars,  in  W.  M.  Rice  case  (New  York),  dated  back  twenty  years, 

showing  careful  erasure  of  printed  figures  of  a  later  dated  note  form. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         45 

they  have  been  made  and  the  paper  was  afterwards 
rubbed  down  and  refinished,  it  may,  in  certain  rare  cases, 
be  difficult  to  show  the  fact,  but  by  this  process  of  erasure 


FIG.    6 — Transmitted    light    photograph,    showing   erasure   by 
abrasion.     "Mar.  4"  on  opposite  side  of  sheet. 

a  portion  of  the  paper  has  been  removed,  rendering  the 
field  of  the  erasure  more  transparent,  and  a  photograph 
of  the  document  by  transmitted  light  may  show  con- 
clusively that  an  erasure  has  been  made. 

Erasures  by  abrasion  or  by  an  ordinary  rubber  eraser 
may  sometimes  be  shown  very  clearly  and  recorded  in 
permanent  form  by  a  photograph  taken  with  the  paper 
placed  obliquely  to  the  plane  of  the  lens  and  plate  and 
inclined  at  just  the  right  angle  of  reflection  to  show  dif- 
ferences in  the  reflected  light  from  different  portions  of 
the  paper  surface.  Such  erasures  should  be  promptly 
photographed,  particularly  in  cases  when  the  handling 
of  the  paper  may  obliterate  or  render  indistinct  condi- 
tions that  originally  may  be  very  clearly  seen. 

Transmitted  light  photography  is  very  useful  in  the 
examination  of  water-marks.  It  also  furnishes  one 
method  of  determining  the  identity  or  difference  in 


46 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


papers  by  showing  arrangement  of  the  fibres  and  the 
markings  of  the  wire  gauze  and  dandy-roll  with  such 


FIG.  7 — Enlarged  transmitted  light  photographs  of  dated  watermarks 
in  writing  paper. 

distinctness  as  to  render  comparison  of  these  character- 
istics easy  that  otherwise  would  be  very  difficult  if  not 
impossible. 

Where  the  question  is  one  of  continuity  of  strokes  or 
of  retouching  of  the  writing,  a  photograph  by  trans- 


FIG.  8 — Transmitted  light  photograph  showing  original  check  punch  charac- 
ters $24$  filled  up  and  $2400$  punched  over  the  same  field. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         47 

mitted  light  will  show  plainly  the  uneven  distribution 
of  ink  in  interrupted  strokes  and  the  presence  of  the 
added  ink  film  in  retouched  strokes.  In  retouched  writ- 
ing the  added  ink,  which  may  make  a  line  twice  as  thick 
in  certain  places,  may  not  change  the  color  of  the  writ- 
ing in  the  least  when  viewed  by  direct  light,  but  will 
simply  change  its  thickness,  and  this  difference  will  be 
plainly  discernible  in  a  transmitted  light  photograph  for 
the  reason  that  the  added  ink  film  will  make  the  line  just 
so  much  more  opaque  at  that  point. 

The  principle  of  stereoscopic  photography,  as  applied 
to  the  microscopic  investigation  of  questioned  docu- 
ments, apparently  has  not  been  employed  hitherto,  and 
illustrations  such  as  those  described  below  have  not  actu- 
ally been  presented  in  a  court  of  law,  but  there  cannot 
be  a  valid  objection  to  a  method  that  certainly  would 
tend  to  promote  the  ends  of  justice. 

The  principle  of  the  stereograph  is  that  of  the  two- 
eyed  view  or  binocular  vision,  by  which  means  things  are 
seen  exactly  as  they  are.  Depth,  or  the  third  dimension 
in  a  stereo-photograph,  is  shown  by  taking  two  views  of 
the  same  object  or  scene  from  slightly  different  points 
of  view,  just  as  the  two  eyes  see,  and  then  by  looking  at 
these  two  views  at  once,  as  united  in  the  stereoscope, 
there  is  carried  to  the  brain  the  same  sense  of  depth  and 
distance  as  is  conveyed  when  the  two  eyes  see  the  actual 
scene. 

The  stereographic  photo-micrograph  shows  conditions 
in  connection  with  certain  questioned  document  cases 
with  remarkable  distinctness.  In  any  inquiry  where  it 
is  desirable  to  show  depth  or  solidity,  such  a  photograph 
is  of  very  great  value.  Questions  of  this  kind  arise  re- 


48  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

garding  the  sequence  of  crossed  lines,  and  also  as  to 
whether  a  writing  across  a  fold  preceded  or  followed  the 
folding  of  the  paper,  this  sometimes  being  a  question  of 
vital  importance. 

Certain  conclusions  regarding  paper  fiber  and  the  re- 
lation of  ink  to  it  and  changed  conditions  in  paper  sur- 
face due  to  erasures  and  changes,  may  be  effectively 
illustrated  in  this  manner.  Stereoscopic  illustrations 
may  also  be  very  helpful  when  the  question  arises  as  to 
whether  typewriting  was  done  on  a  certain  individual 
machine,  the  letters  of  which  show  certain  bruises 
and  imperfections.  Seals  and  impressed  designs  of 
any  kind  can  by  this  same  method  of  illustration 
be  shown  very  clearly.  These  are  all  microscopic 
questions,  and  in  the  absence  of  the  necessary  in- 
struments or  of  appropriate  illustrations,  it  may  be 
impossible  to  show  the  existing  facts. 

To  be  of  any  value  for  these  purposes,  stereoscopic 
photographs  must  be  made  in  greatly  enlarged  form  and 
the  ordinary  stereoscopic  camera  cannot  be  used.  The 
special  apparatus  necessary  carries  only  a  single  lens, 
with  which  two  slightly  different  views  are  made  of  the 
same  object,  and  by  this  means  the  same  result  is  ob- 
tained as  in  simultaneous  views  with  the  two  lenses  of 
the  regular  stereoscopic  camera.  Two  lenses  cannot 
be  used  for  this  work,  as  it  would  be  impossible 
to  bring  the  lenses  close  enough  together  under  the 
required  magnification. 

The  degree  of  enlargement  desirable  in  such  pho- 
tographs naturally  depends  upon  the  conditions,  but 
ranges  from  twenty-five  to  seventy-five  diameters  for 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS.         49 

practical  work.  It  cannot  be  understood  without  actual 
trial  with  what  realism  certain  delicate  microscopic  con- 
ditions can  thus  be  illustrated1. 

Several  highest  courts  of  appeal  have  answered  affirm- 
atively the  question  whether  stereoscopic  photographs, 
and  the  stereoscope  to  view  them,  may  be  used  in  court. 
These  decisions  relate  to  ordinary  stereoscopic  photo- 
graphs, but  the  principle  is  the  same  as  in  the  new  appli- 
cation of  the  stereoscopic  idea  just  described2. 


aSiereoscopic  photographs  of  the  character  described  herewith  can 
be  made  with  any  good  document  camera.  The  cut-outs  (see  Fig. 
23)  in  the  back  of  the  document  camera,  should  be  used  to  cover 
either  the  right  or  left  half  of  the  plate,  and  the  important  part  of 
the  image  should  be  focused  about  one  and  one-half  inches  from 
the  center  of  the  whole  plate  and  the  first  exposure  made.  The  cut- 
out is  then  reversed  and  the  object  is  moved  sufficiently  in  an  exact 
horizontal  direction  so  that  the  image  on  the  ground  glass  has  moved 
over  about  three  inches  on  the  plate  from  the  point  where  the  first 
exposure  was  centered  and  tl\e  second  exposure  is  made.  The  distance 
between  the  two  views,  wrhich  is  governed  by  the  distance  the  object  is 
moved,  determines  the  depth  or  perspective  of  the  resulting  illustration 
and  this  can  be  regulated  as  may  be  desired.  For  observation  with  the 
ordinary  stereoscope  the  negative  or  the  print  must  be  reversed  as 
with  any  stereoscopic  view. 

If  desirable  the  two  views  can  be  made  on  different  plates  by 
marking  on  the  ground  glass  the  exact  center  of  the  first  image  and 
then,  before  exposing  the  second  plate,  moving  the  object  as  far  as  is 
necessary  to  produce  the  desired  depth  or  perspective.  -  . 

This  simple  method  of  making  micro-stereoscopic  photographs, 
requiring  no  complicated  apparatus,  has  been  worked  out  after  many 
experiments  and  produces  results  that  seem  to  be  the  same  as  though 
two  simultaneous  views  were  made  from  two  view  points.  The  method 
is,  of  course,  applicable  only  to  inanimate  objects. 

2"The  next  contention  of  the  appellant  is  that  the  court  erred  in 
admitting  in  evidence  a  stereoscopic  view  of  the  south  side  of  the 
bridge  and  the  embankment;  'also  one  of  State  St.  west  of  the  bridge 
showing  the  surface  of  the  roadway  or  street  and  west  end  of  the 
bridge.  The  court  also  allowed  in  evidence  a  stereoscope  to  aid  the 
jury  in  the  examination  of  the  views.  .  .  . 

There  was  no  error  in  this  action  of  the  court.  It  is  a  com- 
mon practice  to  admit  a  plan  or  picture  shown  to  be  a  correct  repre- 
sentation by  preliminary  proof,  to  aid  the  jury  in  a  proper  under- 
standing of  the  case,  and  we  do  not  see  any  difference  in  the  applica- 
tion of  the  rule  whether  the  picture  is  made  by  hand  or  by  the  art  of 
photography,  the  real  question  being  whether  the  view  be  a  correct 
representation." — Rockford  vs.  Russell,  9  111.  App.  229  (1881). 


50 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


2  o  «4-    • 
t>  -  o  $ 

>8^4>   g- 

1^.5  P 


lls 


-S.fi 

g-.S  EH 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS          51 

Objections  to  the  use  of  photographs  in  court  are 
based  upon  the  theory  that  they  may  be  distorted  and 
not  true  representations  of  the  original,  and  it  is  also 
asserted  that  the  original  affords  the  best  means  for 
study  and  comparison  and  that  no  reproducton  of  it  is 
necessary. 

Photographs  may  be  distorted  and  may  be  dishonest, 
and  if  they  cannot  be  properly  proved,  or  verified  by 
comparison  with  the  original,  they  should  be  excluded. 
If  there  is  any  doubt  about  the  accuracy  of  photographs 
they  can  be  made  by  both  parties,  and  in  questioned 
document  cases  they  can  easily  be  verified  by  compari- 
son with  the  original  paper  which  is  at  hand.  On  ac- 
count of  the  latter  fact  there  is  not  the  legitimate  ob- 
jection to  photographs  of  a  questioned  document  that 
may  arise  over  photographs  of  a  different  nature  which 
cannot  be  compared  and  verified  by  judge,  jury  and 
opposing  counsel. 

The  best  modern  lenses  will  make  photographic  re- 
productions with  the  utmost  accuracy.  They  render 
straight  lines  as  such,  or  possess  the  quality  described 
as  rectilinear;  they  are  without  astigmatism  and  repro- 
duce without  distortion.  By  these  qualities  involuntary 
distortions  and  inaccuracies  are  entirely  eliminated  and 
an  objection  to  photography  is  removed  that  might 
have  been  valid  in  the  early  days  of  the  art.  Lenses 
are  now  made  so  accurately  that  they  are  certified 
by  the  government  Bureau  of  Standards  as  "mak- 
ing reproductions  without  distortion."  There  are  as 
good  reasons  for  objecting  to  the  use  of  an  ordi- 
nary magnifying  glass  or  the  microscope  as  to  an 
enlarged  photograph,  since  such  photographic  repro- 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


duction  is  simply  the  enlarged  view  in  permanent  form. 
The  real  reason  for  most  objections  to  photographs 
is  that  they  do  well  just  what  it  is  intended  they  should 
do,  that  is,  assist  in  showing  the  facts.  Some  ancient 
opinions  recite  a  long  array  of  conditions  that  may  make 
photographs  dangerous  in  courts  of  law,  but  not  one  of 


FIG.  10 — A  three-color  lens,  designed  to  bring  the  primary 

colors  to  sharp  focus  at  same  distance  from  object. 

This  lens   is   certified   by   the   United 

States  Bureau  of  Standards. 

these  objections  is  valid  when  applied  to  properly  proved 
document  photographs.  They  can  be  made  correctly, 
this  fact  can  be  shown,  and  thus  all  objections  are  dis- 
posed of.  Photographs  are  now  rarely  excluded. 

The  making  of  document  photographs,  particularly 
enlargements,  is  a  rather  unusual  task,  and  some  techni- 
cal directions  may  be  of  assistance.  It  is  not  to  be  sup- 
posed that  the  average  photographer  is  prepared  to 
make  the  great  variety  of  photographs  required  for 
the  most  effective  illustration  of  all  the  diverse  phases 
of  the  subject.  Many  of  the  photographs  described 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


53 


Aprii   23-1904. 
Teat  Ko.698. 


C2S'.:v;cATI;   Ot   F7AKIHATIOS 


Two  Photograph! 


here,  however,  can  be  made  almost  anywhere  where 
ordinary  photographs  are  made,  and  even  some  of  the 
more  unusual  work  can  be  done  by  ordinary  operators 
who  will  give  careful  attention  to  the  task. 

The  various  parts 
of  a  document  are 
reproduced  in  exact 
natural  size  or  en- 
larged or  reduced  in 
exact  proportions 
when  the  object,  the 
lens  and  the  photo- 
graphic plate  are  in 
parallel  planes.  This 
position  of  the  lens 
should  be  mechani- 
cally provided  for  in 
the  camera,  and  the 
plate  and  object 
should  be  brought  in- 
to parallel  relations 
to  each  other  and  to 
the  lens.  In  a  regular  document  camera  these  condi- 
tions are  all  secured  by  mechanical  means,  but  if  such 
an  instrument  is  not  available  the  desired  conditions 
can  be  secured  by  giving  careful  attention  to  these  par- 
ticulars as  described. 

It  is  very  difficult  to  enlarge  several  diameters  to  a 
definite  scale  and  at  the  same  time  to  get  the  object  in 
perfect  focus  unless  the  object-board  is  connected  with 
the  camera  itself,  but  such  an  enlargement  can  be  made 
without  a  special  camera  if  adequate  time  is  taken  and 
proper  care  is  exercised. 


FIG.  11— United  States  Bureau  of  Standards 
lens  certificate. 


54 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


. 


Since  it  is  often  desirable  to  make  photographs  on 
very  short  notice  and  in  unusual  places,  a  portable  docu- 
ment camera  is  almost 
indispensable  for  such 
special  work.  Instru- 
ments such  as  are  illus- 
trated here  show  certain 
attachments  and  adjust- 
ments that  make  them 
more  useful  for  this 
work. 

Any  kind  of  ordinary 
photographic  plate  may 
be  used  for  document 
photographs,  but  the 
best  results  can  usually 
be  obtained  by  using  a 
slow  plate.  Exposure 
should  be  ample  and  de- 
velopment carried  well 
along  until  detail  is 
brought  out  in  the  writ- 
ing line  or  stroke  itself. 
Care  should  be  taken 
not  to  make  negatives 
too  strong  in  contrast, 
but  more  contrast  is 
desirable  than  in  a  por- 
trait negative.  Nega- 
tives ought  not  to  be  retouched  in  any  manner,  but  may 
be  intensified  or  reduced  if  necessary. 

Prints  should  be  made  as  carefully  as  the  negatives. 


FIG.  12 — Portable  Document  Camera  with 

detachable  aluminum  foot,  special 

object    board    and    extension 

tube  for  short  focus  lens. 


PHOTOGRAPHY   AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS         55 

They  should  not  be  printed  so  dark  that  detail  in  the 
pen  stroke  itself  is  lost  and  care  should  be  taken  that  the 
paper  be  in  contact  with  the  entire  surface  of  the  nega- 
tive. Many  kinds  of  photographic  papers  may  be  used 
for  this  purpose,  but  if  the  utmost  detail  is  desired  the 
glossy  papers  are  necessary.  For  most  purposes  the 
excellent  modern  developing  papers  are  entirely  suit- 
able. Papers  with  rough  surface  should  not  be  used. 

For  court  use  photographs  mounted  only  on  backing 
paper  are  preferable  in  many  ways.  They  lie  flat,  take 
up  little  room  and  are  convenient  to  handle  and  they  do 
not  warp  or  buckle.  Large  prints  may  be  hinged  in 
the  middle  with  binding  tape.  Even  if  prints  are  to  be 
pasted  in  an  exhibit  book  it  is  desirable  that  they  first 
be  mounted  on  backing  paper  so  that  they  will  lie  per- 
fectly flat.  An  excellent  way  to  arrange  photographs 
for  use  in  court  is  to  print  them  all  the  same  size,  no 
matter  what  size  the  negatives  may  be,  and  hinge  them 
at  one  end  and  bind  them  in  loose-leaf  binders  which 
can  easily  be  taken  apart  if  necessary. 

Varying  conditions  call  for  photographs  in  great 
variety  and  they  should  be  made  in  such  a  way  as  best 
shows  the  particular  fact  that  they  are  intended  to  illus- 
trate. Careful  study  should  always  be  made  of  the  par- 
ticular case  in  hand  in  order  that  photographs  may  be  as 
effective  as  possible.  Those  most  frequently  required 
are  here  described  and  some  suggestions  made  regarding 
their  preparation.  In  addition  to  the  necessary  technical 
knowledge  and  skill  required  for  such  work  considerable 
ingenuity  and  mechanical  ability  are  necessary  if  suitable 
photographs  are  to  be  provided  for  all  the  varied  phases 
of  the  subject  of  questioned  documents. 


56 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


_ 


FIG.  13— Tilting  Camera  Stand  in  posi- 
tion for  side  window  lighting. 


For  reasons  already 
given  a  disputed  docu- 
ment should,  as  a  rule,  be 
photographed  complete  in 
natural  size.  Many  ques- 
tions may  arise  in  the 
course  of  an  inquiry  that 
will  render  such  a  photo- 
graph very  useful.  In 
making  a  comparison  of 
classified  parts,  a  natural 
size  photograph  may  be 
used  to  cut  apart  as  con- 
ditions require;  for  this 
purpose,  however,  it  is 


generally  preferable  to  use  a  photograph  of  the  original 
document  and  of  the  standards  enlarged  from  twenty- 
five  to  fifty  per  cent. 
When  such  slightly  en- 
larged photographs  are 
made  it  is  not  always 
necessary  also  to  photo- 
graph the  documents  in 
natural  size,  but  this 
should  be  done  in  im- 
portant inquiries. 

After  such  classified, 
illustrative  exhibits  are 
made  up  they  can  then 
be  enlarged  two  to  four 

diameters,   depending  Up-     FIG.  14— Tilting  Camera  Stand  in  posi- 
.  ,    ,.  „  tion  for  transmitted  light 

on  the  size  or  delicacy  01  photographs. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS         57 

the  characteristics  illustrated.  These  final  photographs 
are  usually  offered  and  marked  as  exhibits,  but  may  be 
admitted  simply  as  illustrations  of  the  testimony  given 
and  employed  in  the  same  capacity  as  a  blackboard  or 
chart.  They  are  graphic  representations,  however,  from 
which  the  personal  equation  of  the  illustrator  has  been 
eliminated  and  are  simply  testimony  of  an  ocular  nature. 
If  conditions  permit  and  circumstances  warrant  every 
case  should  be  illustrated  in  this  manner. 

Enlarged  photographs  are  desirable  in  nearly  every 
case.  The  fraudulent  character  of  a  signature  is  some- 
times effectively  shown  by  simply  making  an  enlarge- 
ment of  it  of  from  two  to  eight  diameters.  When  such 
a  photograph  is  compared  with  genuine  signatures, 
similarly  enlarged,  it  is  in  some  cases  most  convincing 
proof  of  forgery.  If  a  signature  is  unnaturally  and 
slowly  drawn  or  is  patched  and  retouched,  or  shows 
hesitation  and  stops  at  unusual  places,  these  facts  are 
shown  with  startling  clearness  in  such  an  enlarged 
photograph1. 

In  a  critical  examination  of  questioned  typewriting 
it  may  be  impossible  to  show  actual  similarities  or  dif- 
ferences without  putting  the  separate  specimens  for 
comparison  close  together  in  enlarged  form.  When 
this  side  by  side  comparison  can  be  made  many  signifi- 
cant differing  or  identical  characteristics  are  immediate- 
ly apparent,  as  in  a  comparison  of  handwriting. 

1PThe  sensational  method  of  illustrating  a  forgery  case  by  the  use 
of  lantern  slides,  a  projection  lantern  and  the  wall  of  the  court  room 
as  a  screen,  as  graphically  described  by  J.  G.  Holland  in  his  charming 
story  of  "Sevenoaks,"  has  actually  been  employed.  Circumstances 
might  arise  where  such  a  method  would  be  desirable,  but  the  facts 
most  appropriately  illustrated  by  such  a  method  can  usually  be  more 
effectively  shown  by  direct  photographic  enlargements  that  can  be 
put  into  the  hands  of  the  jury. — "Sevenoaks,"  p.  404  (1875). 


58  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Enlargements  should  be  made  directly  on  the  plate 
from  the  object  itself.  This  can  be  done  by  the  use  of 
lenses  of  proper  focal  length  and  a  camera  with  ad- 
equate extension  of  bellows.  Direct  enlargements  ex- 
hibit every  detail  and  can  be  made  so  as  to  show  even 
the  minutest  characteristics  of  the  original.  An  enlarge- 
ment by  the  bromide  process  from  a  small  negative,  as 
ordinarily  made  in  portrait  photography,  although 
sometimes  useful,  is  never  so  clear  and  distinct  as  a 
direct  enlargement. 

Enlargements  above  ten  diameters  are  necessary  only 
when  that  which  is  to  be  shown  is  of  a  microscopic  char- 
acter, and  these  reproductions  are  usually  described  as 
photo-micrographs.  They  are  often  very  effective  illus- 
trations. In  crossed  line  inquiries,  and  questions  re- 
garding retouching,  line  quality,  writing  over  folds  in 
paper  and  certain  classes  of  erasures  and  changes,  they 
are  really  essential  if  the  facts  are  to  be  clearly  shown. 

Ordinary  photographic  ap- 
paratus    will     not     permit 
these   enlargements    of   ten 
diameters    or    more    to    be 
made  directly  on  the  plate 
for  the  reason  that  they  re- 
Fig.  15 -Remington,  Smith-         quire       Special       sllOl't-foCUS 
Premier  and  Underwood  small  y  s. 

Enlarged  seven  diameters,  showing  lenSCS  UmCSS  a  Very  long 
three  distinctly  different  designs  of  in  •  -i  11 

letters.  bellows   is   available. 

For     all     the     different 

kinds  of  work  required  a  document  camera  should  be 
fitted  with  at  least  four  lenses  of  approximately  the  fol- 
lowing focal  lengths:  one  inch,  five  inches,  ten  inches 
and  twenty  inches.  Photo-microscopic  lenses,  designed 


yyy 


PHOTOGRAPHY   AND   QUESTIONED   DOCUMENTS         59 


especially  for  use  with  an  ordinary  camera,  are  made 
of  as  short  a  focus  as  three-fourths  of  an  inch,  permit- 
ting enlargements  to  be  made  up  to  fifty  diameters  with 
the  usual  document  camera  bellows  extension.  In  order 
to  avoid  the  shadow  of  the  camera  front  it  is  necessary 
to  mount  such  short  focus  lenses  on  a  special  extension 
tube  as  illustrated  in  Figs.  12  and  17. 

In  making  an  enlargement  of  ten  diameters  or  more 
the  object  should  be  illuminated  by  direct  sunlight  or 
intense  artificial  light  in  order  that  the  enlarged  image 
on  the  ground-glass  may  be  accurately  focused.  By  the 
use  of  one  or 
two  ordinary 
small  mirrors 
sunlight  can  be 
thrown  on  the 
object  when  it 
is  not  possible 
to  get  the  cam- 
era itself  in  the 
direct  light.  The 
light  should  not 
come  too  much 
from  one  side 
and  care  should 
be  taken  that 
there  are  no 
strong  shadows  and  no  reflections. 

For  document  photography  of  any  kind,  and  especial- 
ly for  such  enlargements  as  have  just  been  described, 
it  is  very  helpful  to  have  certain  portions  of  the  ground- 
glass  screen  made  entirely  transparent  so  that  by  the 
use  of  a  focusing  glass  the  image  may  be  brought  to  a 


Fig.  16— Transparent  fields  on  ground-glass  screen 
of  Document  Camera. 


60  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

microscopically  sharp  focus.  These  transparent  fields 
can  be  easily  produced  in  permanent  form  on  the 
ground-glass  by  attaching  with  Canada  balsam  narrow 
strips  of  ordinary  glass  to  the  ground  side.  One  who 


FIG.  17— Four  inch  and  one  and  three-eighths  inch  focus  Micro-Photographic 

Lenses  and  Special  Mounting  Tube.     Both  lenses  certified 

by  United  States  Bureau  of  Standards. 

has  not  employed  such  transparent  fields  for  fine  focus- 
ing cannot  realize  what  a  great  help  this  simple  device 
is  in  accurate  work. 

In  making  such  photographs  it  is  almost  imperative 
that  the  object-board  be  connected  with  the  camera  it- 
self and  that  the  plate,  the  lens  and  the  object-board  all 
be  actuated  by  rack  and  pinion  if  enlargements  are  to 
be  made  to  a  definite  scale.  With  the  type  of  instru- 
ment just  described  photographs  of  this  unusual  char- 
acter can  be  made  almost  as  easily  as  ordinary  photo- 
graphs and  with  these  enlargements  made  directly  on 
the  plate  it  is  possible  to  produce  as  many  exact  dupli- 
cate prints  as  may  be  desired,  and  if  necessary  the  plate 
itself  can  be  submitted  in  court  for  verification. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS         61 


FIG.  18 — Removable  Object  Board  for  Document  Camera. 
Actuated  by  rack  and  pinion  and  having  vertical,  hor- 
izontal and  oscillating  movements,  and  controlled 
by  operator  from  back  of  instrument. 


*  FIG.  19 — Object  Carrier  for  transmitted  light  photography. 
Adjustable  horizontally  and  vertically. 


62 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


A  focusing  glass  (Fig.  21),  enlarging  about  ten 
diameters  and  made  so  as  to  exclude  all  side  light,  is  also 
very  useful  and  for  the  finest  work  is  almost  indis- 
pensable. 

An  excellent  method  of  determining  the  degree  of 
enlargement  and  also  of  making  a  permanent  record  of 
it  is  to  provide  an  accurately  divided  scale,  printed  on 

|'H|i|i|l|i|i|l|i|l|l|l|l|i|l|i|l|lW 

FIG.  20 — Photographic  Enlargement  Measure,  graduated 

in  64ths  of  an  inch,  to  be  photographed  with  the 

object  to  serve  as  a  permanent  record  of 

the  degree  of  enlargement. 

thin  paper,  which  is  placed  on  the  object-board  close 
to  or  upon  the  document  and  photographed  with  it.  By 
the  use  of  a  suitable  measure  the  degree  of  enlargement 
desired  can  be  determined  by  measuring  the  image  of 
the  scale  on  the  ground-glass.  This  image  becomes  a 
permanent  part  of  the  negative  and  can  appear,  if  it 
is  desired,  at  one  side  of  the  print  itself  as  is  shown  in 
numerous  illustrations  in  this  book. 

For  measuring  the  image  on  the  ground-glass  beam 
dividers  (Fig.  21),  or  those  with  the  points  parallel, 
will  be  found  very  convenient,  and  a  steel  rule  carrying 
various  divisions  of  an  inch  is  useful  in  making  an  en- 
largement to  a  definite  scale. 


FIG.  21— Focusing  Glasses,  Beam  Dividers  and  Steel  Rule. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


63 


As  a  means  of  determining  accurately  whether  the 
utmost  detail  of  the  original  is  reproduced  in  the  nega- 
tive and  shown  in  the  print,  a  gray  test  scale  may  be 
provided  to  be  photographed  at  one  side  of  the  plate. 
This  consists  of  narrow  graduated  shades  of  gray, 
numbered  from  one  to  five,  the  lightest  shade  being  so 
delicate  as  to  be  almost  pure  white.  If  the  photograph 
shows  the  numbered  shades  of  the  scale  then  it  is  certain 
that  all  the  detail  of  the  object 
photographed  is  faithfully  repro- 
duced. The  photographed  scale  is 
particularly  useful  as  a  guide  in 
making  the  print  of  proper  depth. 
The  gray  scale  is  not  essential  in 
photographing  ordinary  objects. 

For  document  photographs,  es- 
pecially photographs  of  signatures, 
a  series  of  dark  paper  cut-outs,  ar- 
ranged to  go  in  the  back  of  the 
camera  just  in  front  of  the  plate, 
are  often  very  useful.  They  render 
it  possible  to  make  two  or  more  ex- 
posures on  the  same  plate  which 
may  be  very  desirable  in  certain 
comparisons,  or  when  it  is  difficult  FlG 
to  determine  just  the  proper  time 
of  exposure  required  to  show  cer- 
tain conditions.  By  this  method  several  exposures  of 
different  lengths  of  time  can  be  made  on  the  same  plate 
of  the  same  object  or  comparisons  of  different  objects 
can  be  made  as  exposed,  developed  and  printed  from 
the  same  plate. 


2 — A  "Gray  Scale" 
in  natural  size  and  with 
portion  enlarged. 


64 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


In  signature  inquiries  it  is  always  desirable  to  pho- 
tograph the  original  and  the  standards  together  in  order 
of  date.  This  can  be  readily  done  unless  the  original 
documents  are 
too  bulky.  The 
dates  and 
amounts  neces- 
sary to  identify 
the  several 
papers  can  be 
written  in  con- 
densed form 
and  placed  op- 
posite the  sev- 
eral signatures ; 
this  can  be  pho- 
tographed and 
will  appear  on 
the  prints  as  a 

description  of  the  signatures.  It  may  be  desirable  to 
write  this  descriptive  matter  not  on  the  original  docu- 
ments but  on  a  separate  paper. 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  form  characteristics  it  is 
not  usually  advisable  to  enlarge  pencil  writing  as  much 
as  ink  writing,  because  under  great  magnification  the 
line  may  become  so  thin  as  to  be  indistinct,  but  to  show 
retouching,  disconnections,  and  a  slow  drawing  move- 
ment considerable  enlargement  may  be  necessary.  In 
photographing  pencil  writing  it  is  particularly  im- 
portant that  the  object  be  focused  with  the  greatest  care 
in  order  to  secure  the  finest  possible  definition. 

In  making  a  photograph  of  an  unevenness,  like  a 


FIG.  23 — Back  of  camera  removed,  showing  cut- 
outs  in   position   for  making   one   of 
three  exposures  on  same  plate. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS         65 

pencil  indentation  without  color,  a  seal  impression  on 
white  paper,  or  any  similar  object,  the  illumination  must 
be  so  arranged  that  the  light  and  the  shadow  show  the 
outline  of  the  object.  The  space  between  the  lens  and 
the  object  should  be  partly  covered  and  light  should  be 
admitted  mainly  or  entirely  from  one  side  and  should  fall 
on  the  object  at  just  the  proper  angle  to  obtain  a  perfect 
outline.  For  this  work  it  may  be  necessary  to  admit 
light  through  a  slit  only  a  fraction  of  an  inch  in  width. 


FIG.  24 — Post  Mark  and  Embossed  Impression,  without  color, 

on  enclosed  letter,  photographed  by  side  light  admitted 

through  narrow  slit.     See  page  432. 

To  show  lack  of  continuity  or  an  unnatural  order  of 
pen  writing  several  negatives  of  the  matter  in  question 
should  be  made  of  different  lengths  of  exposure  by  both 
direct  and  transmitted  light.  If  three  negatives  are 
made  the  first  should  be  given  one-half,  the  second 
normal  exposure  and  the  third  about  twice  normal  ex- 
posure. Prints  of  varying  degrees  of  depth  from  all 
three  negatives  should  be  made,  some  of  which  will  show 
any  unnatural  order  or  lack  of  continuity  in  the  writing. 

This  same  fact  may  perhaps  be  more  clearly  shown 
by  a  series  of  prints  of  varying  depths  from  a  carefully 


66 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


,, 


/jij^i^ 

!&//  \£vu 


J/^*/fi 
>'  */ 

m 

ms 


FIG.  25 — Enlarged  Photograph  of  impressed  seal  on  white  paper,  taken  by  side 
light.   Case  of  Hunt  v.  Peshtigo  Lumber  Co.,  Grand  Rapids,  Wisconsin,  1903. 

timed  negative.  Several  prints  should  be  made  under 
different  lengths  of  exposure  from  one- fourth  of  normal 
up  to  full  exposure.  It  is  desirable  to  make  several  ex- 
posures in  both  processes  as  the  distinction  may  be  very 
slight  between  the  parts  to  be  compared,  and  it  is  neces- 
sary to  secure  just  the  right  density  or  depth  of  print- 
ing to  show  the  contrast. 

These  methods  may  also  show  differences  in  pencil 
writing  that  are  not  readily  seen  by  the  unaided  eye. 


PHOTOGRAPHY   AND   QUESTIONED   DOCUMENTS         67 

Transmitted  light  photographs  of  varying  depths  of 
printing  sometimes  will  illustrate  the  character  and 
density  of  pencil  strokes  more  effectively  than  can  be 
done  in  any  other  manner. 

In  photographing  folded  and  uneven  papers  it  is 
sometimes  difficult  to  get  them  all  flat  and  level  and  on 
the  same  plane  without  putting  a  glass  over  them. 
Clean  and  clear  glass  should  be  selected  and  for  some 
purposes  glass  without  color  should  be  used.  Common 
glass  has  a  green  color  the  effect  of  which  in  a  photo- 
graph is  to  accentuate  slightly  certain  tints,  but  for 
ordinary  photographs  the  effect  is  very  slight  and  some- 
times may  actually  improve  the  result.  Where  colors 
are  being  differentiated  or  color  screens  are  used  for 
special  purposes,  only  colorless  glass  should  be  placed 
over  papers  that  are  being  photographed. 

It  may  be  desirable  in  certain  special  cases  to  reverse 
a  photograph  and  make  the  print  white  on  black  instead 
of  black  on  white  as  it  appears  in  the  original.  A  pho- 
tograph of  this  character  may  be  useful  when  it  becomes 
necessary  to  reproduce  a  standard  writing  in  ink  for 
comparison  with  pencil,  chalk  or  slate  pencil  writing. 
Such  a  reversed  photograph  does  not  change  the  form 
in  any  way  but  simply  reverses  the  contrast.  This  re- 
sult is  obtained  by  reversing  the  plate  in  the  plate  holder, 
then  from  the  resulting  negative  a  positive  is  made, 
either  by  contact  or  in  the  camera,  and  from  the  posi- 
tive the  print  is  made.  By  reversing  the  first  negative 
as  described  the  final  print  is  made  to  read  correctly 
from  left  to  right.  Some  interesting  results  are  obtained 
by  this  process. 

Appropriate  color  screens  or  ray  filters  are  necessary 


68 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


in  photographing  certain  colors  and  under  some  con- 
ditions no  suitable  photographs  whatever  can  be  made 
without  them.  The  two  principal  colors  which  require 


FIG.  26 — Color  Screens  and  Ray  Filters  of  varying  depths 
and  tints. 


the  use  of  screens  are  blue  and  violet,  and  sometimes 
the  color  of  the  paper  or  background  is  such  that  a  color 
screen  is  desirable  even  with  black  ink.  Manila,  orange, 
yellow  and  certain  other  colored  papers,  especially  when 
photographed  with  white  papers,  require  a  color  screen 
in  order  to  make  the  background  more  nearly  uniform. 
In  some  instances  a  color  screen  is  useful  in  order  to 
reduce  or  eliminate  surrounding  lines,  strokes  or  words 
that  tend  to  obscure  the  writing  in  dispute. 

Orange  and  yellow  screens  are  most  frequently 
needed  and  two  or  three  different  depths  should  be 
provided  which  will  increase  normal  exposure  approxi- 
mately five  to  ten  times.  In  making  enlargements  or 
in  making  any  photographs  where  the  utmost  detail  is 
necessary  it  is  sometimes  desirable  to  use  a  large  color 


PHOTOGRAPHY  AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS         69 

screen  or  plate  directly  over  the  object  photographed. 

Under  very  high  magnification  ordinary  color  screens 

or  filters  used  on  the  lens  may  interfere  somewhat  with 

the  optical  qualities  of  even  the  highest  type  of  lenses. 


FIG.  27 — Photographs  of  the  same  matter  without  and  with  an  appropriate 
color  screen.    See  also  Fig.  147. 

This  disturbance  may  be  minimized  or  entirely  elimin- 
ated when  the  color  screen  is  put  in  actual  contact  with 
the  object  photographed.  The  use  of  the  screen  in  this 
way  is,  of  course,  only  possible  with  objects  on  the  same 
plane,  as  in  document  photography,  and  with  those  of 
not  too  great  area. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  colored  light  of  the  proper 
tint  might  be  projected  upon  the  object  so  that  it 
could  be  easily  modified  and  controlled  and  made  to 
cover  a  large  field;  and  no  doubt  for  certain  copying 
work  this  method  would  have  advantages1. 

*As  in  so  many  other  fields  of  scientific  investigation,  the  German 
contribution  to  this  application  of  photography  to  the  investigation  of 
documents  exceeds  that  of  all  other  nations  and  an  exhaustive  study 
of  the  subject  must  include  the  German  works.  A  very  full  list  of  these 
books  and  pamphlets  is  given  in  the  bibliography  of  this  book. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Controverted  questions  of  fact  which  become  the  sub- 
ject of  testimony  are  finally  presented  to  those  called 
upon  to  decide  the  issue  either  through  the  sense  of  hear- 
ing alone  or  through  the  sense  of  hearing  and  sight.  It 
is  too  often  assumed  that  all  who  hear  testimony  under- 
stand it,  which  may  be  far  from  the  fact,  and  those  with 
the  most  experience  know  best  that  the  presentation 
of  visible  evidence  may  be  vastly  more  effective  than  an 
appeal  to  the  sense  of  hearing  alone.  When  it  is  feas- 
ible, therefore,  it  becomes  important  that  testimony  be 
made  visible  in  every  way  possible.  Fortunately  this 
result  can  often  be  attained  in  disputed  document  cases, 
and  inquiries  of  this  kind  are  by  this  means  brought 
into  a  distinctly  different  class  from  those  investiga- 
tions in  which  an  intangible  question  becomes  the  sub- 
ject of  exclusively  oral  testimony. 

As  is  well  known  the  instrument  which  makes  it  pos- 
sible to  see  physical  evidence  that  otherwise  might  be 
invisible  is  the  microscope,  but  its  application  to  the  in- 
vestigation of  documents  is  not  so  well  understood.  Ob- 
jection is  also  always  made  to  the  use  of  the  instrument 
in  court  and  the  necessity  for  its  employment  must  be 
briefly  considered,  although  it  would  seem  that  no  ex- 
tended argument  should  be  required  on  so  obvious  a 
proposition. 

lrThis  chapter,  in  slightly  different  form,  was  first  printed  in  Vol. 
VI,  No.  12  of  the  Journal  of  Applied  Microscopy  and  Laboratory 
Methods,  Mr.  L.  B.  Elliott,  editor,  and  is  reprinted  here  by  permission. 
The  files  of  that  valuable  publication,  which  are  to  be  found  in  all  lead- 
ing technical  libraries,  contain  many  practical  articles  on  the  general 
subject  of  microscopy. 

[70] 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       71 

The  incalculable  value  of  the  microscope  in  many 
fields  of  scientific  investigation  and  particularly  in  the 
field  of  medicine,  is  well  understood,  and  the  great  value 
of  the  instrument  for  the  purposes  herein  described  is  at 
once  recognized  when  the  questions  to  be  investigated 
are  merely  stated. 

It  is  difficult  for  us  to  appreciate  fully,  although  the 
fact  is  known  even  to  school  children,  that  the  two  well 
known  instruments  that  come  to  the  aid  of  sight,  the 
telescope  and  the  microscope,  each  actually  introduces 
us  into  a  new  world.  We  know  but  do  not  quite  fully 
understand  how  by  one  sight  is  vastly  lengthened ;  by  the 
other,  marvelously  intensified. 

The  average  unaided,  or  so-called  naked  eye,  can  dis- 
tinguish separate  lines  up  to  a  fineness  of  only  about 
two  hundred,  or  two  hundred  and  fifty,  to  the  inch,  lines 
finer  than  this  appearing  as  a  solid  shade  or  tint1.  Con- 
sidering this  fact  it  is  easy  to  understand  how  far  be- 
yond unaided  human  sight  are  the  individual  red  cor- 
puscles in  the  blood  when  we  know  that  about  three 
thousand  of  them  laid  side  by  side  extend  only  an  inch. 
They  are  as  far  from  unassisted  vision  as  the  beautiful 
rings  of  Saturn  were  before  the  invention  of  the 
telescope. 


lrThe  normal  eye  can  distinguish  from  200  to  250  lines  to  the  inch 
and  in  a  microscope  such  magnifying  power  should  be  used  as  will  ap- 
parently bring  the  structure  which  is  sought  after  at  least  up  to  this 
figure.  To  illustrate,  take  a  %  inch  objective  of  0.77  N.  A.  and  a  2  inch 
eyepiece.  An  objective  of  this  kind,  properly  corrected,  resolves  the 
test-object  Pleurosigna  angulatum,  in  which  the  lines  average  60,000 
to  the  inch.  With  the  above  eyepiece  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  see 
them,  while  if  it  is  replaced  by  a  %  inch  or  %  inch  eyepiece,  they  can 
easily  be  distinguished.  This  is  not  owing  to  any  peculiar  quality  of 
the  eyepiece,  but  merely  to  the  fact  that  by  increasing  the  magnify- 
ing power,  the  dimensions  of  the  object  have  been  increased  to  such 
an  extent  that  the  lines  have  apparently  been  separated  and  become 
visible  to  the  eye.: — Manipulation  of  the  Microscope,  Edward  Bausch, 
pp.  109-110. 


72  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

In  law  inanimate  things  may  become  instruments  of 
evidence  and  speak  for  themselves,  and  the  ends  of 
justice  are  always  served  when  means  are  provided  to 
show  the  facts  more  clearly.  The  microscope  provides 
such  means,  and  is  simply  indispensable  if  the  facts  in 
certain  disputed  document  investigations  are  to  be  clear- 
ly shown ;  and  a  great  variety  of  questions  which  it  alone 
can  answer  arise  in  connection  with  a  study  of  the  vari- 
ous phases  of  forgery.  In  many  instances  its  evidence 
is  conclusive,  and  without  such  assistance  as  it  gives  we 
may  indeed  have  eyes  and  see  not. 

In  this  special  work,  as  in  other  fields,  the  instrument 
is  necessary  because  it  enables  the  observer  to  see  clearly 
what  otherwise  is  actually  invisible  or  can  only  be  seen 
indistinctly;  and  in  this  connection  it  should  always  be 
emphasized  that  physical  facts  are  not  less  significant, 
if  they  actually  exist,  simply  because  the  unaided  eye 
cannot  see  them.  It  surely  is  good  sense  as  well  as  good 
law  that  this  useful  instrument  have  a  place  in  court 
whenever  it  will  thus  assist  in  pointing  the  way  to  truth. 
This  it  will  often  do. 

The  use  of  the  instrument  in  a  court  of  law  is,  how- 
ever, still  somewhat  of  a  novelty  because  for  so  long  a 
time  a  juryman  was  not  deemed  able  to  see  things  for 
himself,  but  was  simply  expected  to  listen  to  reports  of 
observations  made  by  others.  If  the  observers  disagreed 
he  was  often  helpless,  as  he  still  is  regarding  things  dis- 
puted which  he  cannot  see  and  understand.  If  modern 
improved  methods  of  investigation  are  employed,  as  is 
now  possible  in  many  cases,  a  judge,  a  competent 
referee,  or  an  intelligent  juryman  cannot  easily  be  mis- 
led by  those  who  bear  false  witness,  or  by  a  client  and 
his  attorney  who  are  opposed  to  the  fact. 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS      73 

Many  of  the  conditions  calling  for  the  use  of  the 
microscope  are  those  which  make  certain  photographs 
very  useful,  and  photography  and  microscopy  effective- 
ly supplement  each  other  in  many  inquiries.  The  micro- 
scope serves  to  discover  and  show  the  physical  fact  by 
direct  view  of  the  thing  itself,  while  the  photograph, 
especially  in  enlarged  form,  makes  examination  and 
study  easy  that  otherwise  might  be  difficult  or  even 
impossible  for  some  observers. 

The  following  brief  description  of  some  of  the  more 
important  of  the  various  uses  of  the  microscope  in  the 
examination  of  documents  will  direct  attention  to  phases 
of  such  an  investigation  that  otherwise  might  be  over- 
looked, and  will  also  afford  opportunity  of  describing 
and  illustrating  the  special  apparatus  useful  in  this  work. 

Forged  signatures  in  many  cases  are  not  really  writ- 
ten, but  carefully  and  laboriously  drawn  from  a  model 
with  frequent  liftings  of  the  pen  and  occasional  stop- 
ping of  its  motion  even  when  not  lifted.  With  the 
microscope  arranged  for  transmitted  light  observation 
the  lapping  of  lines  and  uneven  ink  distribution  are  seen 
with  astonishing  clearness. 

A  document  or  part  of  a  document  is  sometimes 
proved  to  be  fraudulent  if  it  can  be  conclusively  shown 
that  a  part  of  the  writing  preceded  and  a  part  followed 
the  folding  of  the  paper.  An  ink  line  crossing  a  fold 
has  certain  definite  characteristics,  but  such  a  line  may 
not  be  more  than  one  one-hundredth  of  an  inch  in  width, 
and  the  unaided  eye  may  not  be  able  to  see  the  physical 
evidence  of  the  fact  which  under  the  microscope  is  so 
plain  that  it  cannot  be  denied.  A  tiny  portion  of  the  ink 
in  such  a  case  may  actually  have  gone  through  the  paper 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  28 — Ink  lines  made  over  fold  at  the  top  and  below  a  fold  made  across 
an  ink  line.     Natural  size  and  enlarged  x  27. 


to  the  opposite  side,  and  under  the  microscope  this  fact 
is  unmistakable. 

Fraudulent  documents  are  frequently  brought  for- 
ward purporting  to  be  several  years  of  age  which  in 
fact  are  only  a  few  days  or  weeks  old.  Such  documents 
may  contain  iron-nutgall  ink  which  still  has  the  distinct, 
fresh,  blue  color  of  recent  use  and  has  not  nearly  reached 
its  ultimate  degree  of  blackness.  The  magnified  image 
of  such  a  writing  in  good  daylight  shows  its  exact  tint 
and  may  be  made  a  matter  of  record  by  the  use  of  the 
color  microscope.  By  this  means  the  ink  color  as  first 
seen  can  be  compared  with  itself  a  few  weeks  later  when 
it  will  have  so  changed  and  blackened  as  to  show  con- 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       75 


FIG.  29— Crossed  lines    in    raised   note 
case,  showing  that  upper  line  "Twen- 
ty" was  written  last.   Nigrosin  ink, 


original   lines, 


inch   wide. 


Case  of  People  vs.  Walker, 
Warsaw,  N.  Y. 


clusively  that  the  docu- 
ment could  not  be  sev- 
eral years  old ;  and  prac- 
tically this  is  final  proof 
that  such  a  document  is 
fraudulent. 

Fraudulent  additions 
and  interlineations  in 
documents  often  touch 
the  original  writing,  and 
the  sequence  or  order  of 
writing  is  ascertained  by 
showing  which  of  the 
crossed  lines  or  strokes 
was  last  written.  This 
obscure  and  delicate  fact 
the  microscope  will 
often  show  with  surpris- 
ing distinctness. 

Many  other  inquiries 
arise  regarding  ink  in 
which  the  microscope  is 
necessary  if  the  truth  is 
to  be  known.  For  ex- 
ample it  may  be  shown 
that  two  writings  are 
made  with  different  inks 
because  in  one  a  micro- 
scopic sediment  or  pre- 
cipitate is  present  which 
is  not  in  the  other.  The 


76 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


s 


FIG.  30 — Illustration  of  sediment  in  ink.  Actual  size 
and  enlarged  x  22. 


precipitate  appears  in  the  form  of  very  fine  specks  or 
black  particles,  darker  in  color  than  the  main  body  of  the 
ink  and  entirely  invisible  without  the  microscope. 


FIG.  31 — An  erasure  by  abrasion  photographed  by  side  light.  Example  of  "9" 

changed  to  "90"  after  erasure  of  end  of  stroke  under 

the  two  ciphers.    Enlarged  x  27. 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       77 

Many  erasures  and  changes  of  a  fraudulent  character 
are  made  in  documents  which  would  entirely  escape  de- 
tection if  examined  only  with  the  unaided  eye,  but  when 
examined  under  the  magnification  of  a  good  microscope 
they  appear  so  plainly  that  anyone  can  see  them. 

Forged  signatures  are  frequently  first  outlined  in 
pencil  and  then  carefully  inked  over.  In  such  forgeries 
the  pencil  marks  not  covered,  indentations,  and  in  some 
cases  the  graphite  caught  in  the  ink  film,  may  be  shown 
by  the  microscope  with  such  clearness  that  the  method 
by  which  the  signatures  were  made  is  unmistakable. 

In  the  examination  of  typewriting  the  microscope  is 


FIG.  32 — Illustration  made  to  show  pencil  outline  of  letter  covered  and  partly 
covered  with  ink.     Actual  size  and  enlarged  x  13. 


78  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

necessary  to  show  numerous  conditions  bearing  on  the 
questions  of  genuineness  and  identity.  Numerous  other 
uses  are  found  for  the  microscope  in  the  investigation 
of  the  many  questions  that  arise  regarding  documents. 
In  many  instances,  in  fact,  it  is  the  only  means  that  will 
lead  unerringly  to  the  truth. 

High  power  magnification  in  these  various  examina- 
tions is  usually  neither  required  nor  desirable  and  may 
actually  render  the  microscope  useless  as  a  means  of 
showing  the  fact.  It  is  a  common  fallacy  to  suppose 
that  the  greatest  possible  magnification  is  always  desir- 
able, the  fact  not  being  understood  that  the  field  of  view 
is  diminished  in  proportion  to  the  degree  of  magnifica- 
tion1. The  process  of  microscopic  examination  is  com- 
paratively simple,  and  with  suitable  instruments  and 
proper  assistance,  judge  and  jury,  or  any  unskilled  ob- 
server, can  see  what  is  pointed  out  and  verify  all  testi- 
mony based  upon  the  microscope.  Testimony  thus  en- 
forced becomes  not  a  mere  statement  of  opinion,  but 


Beginners  as  a  rule  are  apt  to  use  too  much  magnification  or 
amplification,  and  often  attempt  to  view  a  large  surface  with  an  objec- 
tive which  will  show  but  a  small  part  of  it.  It  must  not  be  forgotten 
that  the  apparent  field  of  view  is  decreased  as  higher  powers  are  used 
and  that  a  low  power  will  give  a  better  impression  of  a  large,  coarse 
object  and  its  relative  parts,  because  it  makes  a  larger  surface  visible. 

The  following  table  will  probably  be  of  assistance  to  the  beginner. 
After  he  has  become  better  acquainted  with  his  instrument  his  judg- 
ment will  dictate  to  him  what  to  do. 

A  power  of  25  diameters  will  show  a  surface  or  about  1-5  inch 
diameter. 

A  power  of  50  diameters  will  show  a  surface  of  about  1-10  inch 
diameter. 

A  power  of  100  diameters  will  show  a  surface  of  about  1-20  inch 
diameter. 

A  power  of  500  diameters  will  show  a  surface  of  about  1-100  inch 
diameter. 

A  power  of  1000  diameters  will  show  a  surface  of  about  1-200  inch 
diameter. 

This  table  is  approximately  correct  with  a  Huyghenian  eyepiece. — 
Manipulation  of  the  Microscope,  Edward  Bausch,  pp.  110-111. 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS      79 


~,  . 


FIG.  33 — Photo-Micrograph(x  18),  showing  "  100"  changed 

to  "900"  by  addition  of  top  to  figure  1.    Size  of 

original  shown  in  small  illustration  in  corner. 

simply  a  recital  of  significant  facts  which  can  then  be 
interpreted  by  court  and  jury. 

As  briefly  described  in  the  previous  chapter,  photo- 
micrographs, made  by  the  aid  of  the  microscope  or  with 
microscopic  lenses,  are  frequently  very  useful  and  in 
some  instances  are  absolutely  conclusive.  They  sup- 
plement the  ordinary  use  of  the  microscope  in  a  very 
forcible  way.  The  enlargement  shows  plainly  in  per- 
manent form  what  can  otherwise  be  seen  with  the  micro- 
scope only  temporarily  by  one  observer  at  a  time,  and, 
as  such  illustrations  are  easily  verified  by  comparison 
with  the  actual  image  as  seen  in  the  instrument,  no  valid 
objections  can  be  raised  against  them. 


80 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  34— Special  Bausch  &  Lomb  Document  Microscope.  The  instrument 
illustrated  has  extra  large  special  mechanical  stage  with  two  rack  and  pin- 
ion movements,  ring  document  holders  back  of  stage,  bull's-eye  condenser 
for  direct  illumination,  Abbe  substage  condenser,  special  long  spring  clips 
for  holding  papers,  and  light,  broad,  detachable  base. 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       81 


Instruments  especially  designed  for  examination  of 
documents  should  have  a  special  large  stage  with  ample 
room  behind  the  objective;  a  microscope  is  also  greatly 
improved  for  the  purpose  if  provided  with  a  large 
mechanical  stage  with  rack  and  pinion  movements.  A 
sub-stage  condenser,  for  certain  transmitted  light  ex- 
aminations, and  a  condenser  on  a  movable  arm  for  throw- 
ing additional  light  on  opaque  objects  from  above  should 
also  be  included.  A  document  microscope  should  be 
fitted  with  several  eyepieces  and  with  a  variety  of  ob- 
jectives. A  one-sixth  objective  is  as  high  a  power  as  is 
likely  ever  to  be  needed,  and  this  is  but  seldom  required. 

The  document  microscope  is  better  adapted  for  certain 
uses  if  provided  with 
rings  having  openings 
on  the  lower  side  and 
placed  back  of  the 
stage;  these  rings  will 
hold  a  large  document 
when  it  is  rolled  and 
will  allow  the  edge  or 
any  part  to  be  drawn 
out  under  the  objective 
for  observation.  This 
will  obviate  the  neces- 
sity of  folding,  creas- 
ing or  injuring  the 
paper  in  any  way  and 
permit  it  to  be  reversed 
so  that  the  image  ap- 
pears right  side  up. 


FIG.  35— Microscope  with  Filar  Microm- 
eter, mounted  on  special  horse- 
shoe foot. 


82 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


One  of  the  in- 
dispensable acces- 
sories of  a  docu- 
ment microscope  is 
the  filar-microme- 
ter, which  is  illus- 
trated in  Fig.  35. 
As  has  already  been 
seen  this  device  is 
very  useful  in  many 
instances  for  mak- 
ing accurate  meas- 
urements and  com- 
parisons, and  its 
value  is  increased 
because  but  little 
skill  is  required  in 
its  manipulation. 

For  the  examination  of  large  papers,  matter  on  the 
pages  of  books,  and  all  documents  which  should  not  be 
folded,  it  is  desirable  that  the  microscope  be  mounted  on 
a  special  foot  without  a  stage  and  with  an  open  field 
directly  under  the  objective,  as  shown  in  Fig.  35.  The 
stereoscopic  microscope,  described  later,  as  regularly 
constructed  has  an  auxiliary  horse-shoe  foot  of  this 


FIG.  36— Widths  of  pen  strokes  made  with  dif- 
ferent pens,  measured  with  Filar  Microme- 
ter.   Upward  strokes  of  No.  1  TiT  inch, 
No.  2  Tl3  inch,  No.  3  ^  inch1. 


'Measurement  of  pen  strokes — shown  in  Fig.  36 — was  made  with 
the  Filar  Micrometer  with  two-thirds  inch  objective,  160  mm.  tube 
length  and  the  regular  one-inch  Filar  Micrometer  eyepiece.  With 
this  equipment  525  points  on  the  toothed  indicator  and  the  micrometer 
graduated  wheel  equal  1-100  inch,  which  fact  is  determined  by  meas- 
uring with  the  instrument  the  actual  graduation  of  1-100  inch  on  the 
Stage  Micrometer.  The  measurements  of  the  upward  strokes  of  the 
letter  were:  No.  1,  350  points;  No.  2,  430  points;  No.  3,  548  points, 
which  in  decimal  fractions  represent  parts  of  an  inch  as  follows:  No. 
1,  .0066;  No.  2,  .0081;  No.  3,  0104,  which  represented  in  common 
fractions  are  the  widths  shown  under  the  illustration. 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       83 


kind.  This  style  of  in- 
strument permits  the 
middle  or  any  part  of  a 
large  surface  to  be  ex- 
amined, which  otherwise 
might  be  impossible  on 
the  small  stage  of  the 
ordinary  microscope. 

A  camera-lucida  at- 
tachment, with  which 
drawings  may  be  made 
directly  from  the  micro- 
scopic image,  is  occas- 
ionally useful  and  af- 
fords a  ready  means  for 
making  large  illustra- 
tions and  outlines,  par- 
ticularly of  matter  which 
may  be  introduced  so 

late  in  a  trial  as  to  prevent  its  being  photographed. 
Drawings  of  this  character  are  sometimes  excluded,  but, 
if  properly  proved,  are  usually  admitted  as  illustrations 
of  testimony.  (See  Fig.  57.) 

When  making  a  microscopic  examination  those  un- 
familiar with  the  microscope  should  be  explicitly  in- 
formed exactly  as  to  what  they  are  looking  at  and  how 
much  of  it  they  are  seeing.  It  is  not  generally  under- 
stood by  the  inexperienced  that  the  image  is  inverted 
and  that  the  field  of  vision  is  restricted  in  proportion 
to  the  magnification.  Many  observers  when  looking 
into  a  microscope  expect  to  see  the  whole  page  of  a 


FIG.  37— Microscope  with  Camera  Lucida 
attachment  and  special  foot. 


84  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

document  greatly  enlarged  instead  of  a  small  portion 
of  one  letter  or  word. 

During  such  examinations  observers  should  usually 
be  seated  and  should  not  be  hurried.  Time  enough 
should  be  taken  to  get  the  eye  just  at  the  proper  point1. 
Many  look  in  a  microscope  and  see  nothing  because  of 
embarrassment,  haste,  or  improper  assistance.  This 
need  not  be  the  result  if  the  examination  is  properly 
conducted. 

If  the  examination  does  not  require  the  determination 
of  tints  and  shades  of  color,  artificial  light  may  be  pro- 
vided; court  room  light  is  frequently  very  dim  and  a 
good  artificial  light  placed  in  proper  relation  to  the 
microscope  often  assists  greatly. 

A  special  opaque  eye-shade,  attached  to  the  top  of 
the  microscope  tube,  to  shield  the  eye  not  used  for  ob- 
servation, will  be  of  assistance  to  those  who  are  not  ac- 
customed to  microscopic  observations.  To  accommo- 
date varying  eyes  it  is  also  well  to  advise  each  observer 
to  vary  the  focus  slightly  by  the  fine  adjustment  until 
the  object  is  perfectly  distinct. 

The  amount  of  magnification  required  obviously  de- 
pends upon  the  question  to  be  determined  and,  as  stated 
above,  high  magnification  is  not  usually  desirable.  For 
examination  of  crossed  lines,  traces  of  pencil  marks, 

lrThere  is  one  point  over  the  lens  called  the  eye-point  at  which 
the  rays  cross  within  the  smallest  compass  and  this  is  the  proper  posi- 
tion for  the  eye,  as  the  largest  number  of  rays  enter  it.  When  above 
or  below  this  point  the  size  of  field  will  be  rather  reduced,  or  shadows 
or  colors  will  appear  in  it.  In  low  power  eyepieces  the  eye-point  is 
farther  than  the  lens;  in  high  powers,  quite  close — in  fact,  in  some  so 
close  that  the  eyelashes  may  rest  upon  the  lens  and  may  sometimes 
appear  to  be  in  the  field  as  dark  bars.  Generally  speaking-  the  best 
point  is  where  the  entire  field  is  seen  and  its  margin  (diaphragm) 
sharply  defined. — Manipulation  of  the  Microscope,  Edward  Bausch, 
p.  131. 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       85 


line  edges,  paper  fiber,  retouching,  and  certain  ink  con- 
ditions high  magnification  is  sometimes  useful,  but  for 
many  purposes  a  magnification  of  only  from  twenty 
to  one  hundred  diameters  gives  the  best  results1. 

It  is  not  often  that  objection  is  made  to  the  ordinary 
magnifying  glass,  but  the  appearance  of  a  microscope 
in  court  is  usually  the  cause  of  a  storm  of  protest;  the 
objections  to  the  use  of  the  instrument  usually  being 

lrThe  Magnification  Table  printed  below,  prepared  and  published  by 
the  Bausch  &  Lomb  Optical  Co.,  of  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  will  be  found 
convenient  for  reference.  The  objectives  and  eyepieces  are  desig- 
nated in  inches  and  also  in  millimeters.  With  a  known  tube  length  the 
degree  of  magnification  reached  by  any  combination  is  read  off  at  the 
intersection  of  the  lines. 


Tube  length 
160  mm. 

EYEPIECES 

Tube  length 
6.3  in. 

OBJECTIVES 

2  in. 
50mm. 

l%i«. 
38mm. 

lin. 
25  mm. 

%in. 
18mm. 

Kin. 
12mm. 

OBJECTIVES 

3     iii. 

9 

12 

16 

23 

31 

75     mm. 

2     in. 

14 

19 

26 

36 

47 

50     mm. 

l%in. 

18 

25 

34 

48 

63 

37     mm. 

1     in. 

34 

48 

63 

90 

118 

25     mm. 

%in. 

41 

60 

87 

110 

146 

17     mm. 

%in. 

62 

91 

121 

176 

228 

12.5  mm. 

14  in. 

145 

220 

285 

420 

550 

6.3  mm. 

i  in. 

180 

260 

340 

495 

640 

5    mm. 

^in. 

205 

290 

385 

550 

720 

4.2mm. 

yain. 

270 

415 

530 

760 

975 

3.2  mm. 

&  in. 

340 

510 

670 

970 

1290 

2.5  mm. 

A  in. 

470 

675 

700 

1300 

1675 

2.1  mm. 

A  in. 

640 

875 

1125 

1575 

2075 

1.6  mm. 

It  is  evident  that  a  lens  magnifies  an  object  equally  in  all  direc- 
tions; this  is  said  to  be  in  areas,  and  is  the  square  of  the  linear,  so 
that  if  an  object  is  magnified  four  times  in  the  linear,  it  is  sixteen 
times  in  area.  The  commonly  accepted  term  to  express  magnifying 
power  of  simple,  as  well  as  compound  microscopes,  is  in  diameters 
(linear).  A  single  lens  of  1  inch  focus  magnifies  about  ten  diameters; 
one  of  2  inch  focus,  about  five  diameters;  one  of  %  inch  focus,  twenty 
diameters  and  so  on.  In  a  lens  of  high  magnifying  power,  the  focus 
is  ordinarily  about  twice  the  diameter,  so  that,  if  a  lens  is  %  inch 
diameter  its  focus  is  about  1  inch. — Manipulation  of  the  Microscope, 
Edward  Bausch,  pp.  39-40  (1897). 


86 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


based  upon  the  somewhat  natural  but  erroneous  idea 
that  if  a  thing  exists  that  is  really  significant  it  can  be 
seen  by  unaided  vision. 

It  seems  to  be  overlooked  by  those  who  object  that 
ordinary  spectacles  are  simply  lenses  placed  between 
the  eye  and  the  object  looked  at  and  are  merely  a  means 
by  which  sight  is  corrected  and  improved,  and  that  the 
most  elaborate  and  complicated  microscope  is  nothing 
more  than  an  extension  of  this  same  principle.  To  be 
consistent  one  who  objects  to  the  use  of  the  microscope 

should  also  insist  that 
judge  and  jury  should 
be  compelled  to  remove 
spectacles  before  exam- 
ining a  document  that  is 
questioned  in  a  court  of 
law.1 

In  certain  inquiries 
the  principle  employed 
in  stereoscopic  photog- 
raphy, or  what  is  known 
as  binocular  vision,  is 
useful  as  applied  to  the 
microscope  and  such  an 
instrument  (Fig.  38)  is 
now  available.  This 
microscope  differs  radi- 
cally from  the  ordinary 
double  eye-piece  instru- 
ment and  consists  of  two  complete  microscopes  so  ar- 


FIG.  38 — Stereoscopic  Microscope  with 
hard  rubber  special  foot. 


Supplying    the    jury    with    magnifying    glass,    with    the    permission 
of  the   court,   was   no  just   cause   of   complaint.      Many  jurors   are   re- 


THE  MICROSCOPE  AND   QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS       87 

ranged  that  they  focus  on  exactly  the  same  image;  the 
combined  two-eye  view  gives  the  true  steroscopic  effect, 
and  in  certain  kinds  of  cases  is  of  very  great  assistance 
in  showing  the  exact  facts. 

Such  a  microscope  is  particularly  useful  in  studying 


quired  by  age  or  defect  of  sight,  to  use  glasses  to  enable  them  to  read 
the  evidence  submitted  to  them  or  to  read  the  instructions  of  the 
court.  If  one  of  such  jurors  should  lose  his  spectacles  it  would  be 
rather  a  rigid  sort  of  practice  which  would  preclude  the  court  from 
allowing  glasses  to  be  handed  to  him  to  enable  him  to  examine  such 
writings  as  his  duty  requires  him  to  examine.  We  cannot  see  that 
allowing  the  jurors  to  use  the  magnifying  glass  was  any  departure 
from  proper  practice  in  the  trial  of  causes. — Barker  vs.  The  Town 
of  Perry,  Iowa  67,  146  (1885). 

With  the  aid  of  the  camera  lucida  he  has  made  drawings  of 
the  disputed  signature  .  .  .  .  so  as  to  make  apparent  to  ordinary 
observation  any  singularity  of  formation,  feature  or  proportion  that 
may  serve  to  distinguish  or  identify  either  of  them. — Sharon  vs.  Hill, 
26  Fed.  Rep.  358  (1885). 

When  the  jury  were  about  retiring  to  consider  of  their  verdict 
in  this  case,  the  defendant  below,  by  his  counsel,  asked  permission 
of  the  court  to  furnish  the  jury  magnifying  glasses,  that  they  might 
examine  the  writings  admitted  to  be  genuine  and  compare  the  same 
with  the  note  in  controversy,  which  the  court  refused,  but  said  to  the 
jury  that  they  might  use  their  own  spectacles.  Why  a  jury  should 
not  be  allowed  the  use  of  means  to  aid  them  in  the  examination  and 
comparison  of  handwriting  submitted  to  them  to  be  examined  and 
compared,  which  have  been  found  by  the  experience  of  bankers  and 
business  men  of  the  highest  utility  for  such  purpose,  we  are  unable 
to  understand.  There  is  no  more  mystery  in  such  a  glass  than  in 
ordinary  spectacles  in  daily  use.  An  unlearned  man,  other  things 
being  equal,  can  see  through  such  glasses  quite  as  well  as  the  most 
learned.  For  these  reasons  we  think  the  Circuit  Judge  erred  in  his 
ruling  on  this  point,  and  we  reverse  the  judgment  and  remand  the 
case  for  a  new  trial. — Kannon  vs.  Galloway,  49  Tenn.  230  (1872). 

The  microscope  is  exceedingly  valuable  in  detecting  erasures  or 
other  changes,  in  revealing  the  actual  sequence  or  order  of  writing 
of  additions  and  interlineations  which  touch  a  signature  or  writing 
above  which  they  are  placed,  and  in  the  examination  of  crossed  lines, 
traces  of  pencil  marks,  line  edges,  paper  fibre,  retouching,  and  ink 
conditions. — Moore  on  Facts,  Vol.  I.  Sec.  662  (1908). 

As  to  photographs  which  were  so  enlarged-  as  to  make  the  propor- 
tions plainer  we  see  no  valid  objection.  Magnifying  glasses  and  micro- 
scopes have  always  been  used  and  parties  are  entitled  to  use  them. — 
Howard  v.  Illinois  Tr.  &  Sav.  Bank.  189  111.  579  (1901). 

The  minute  features  of  the  writing — particularly  those  which 
indicate  an  erasure  or  a  tracing — are  often  in  their  full  detail  invisible 
to  the  naked  eye,  and  hence  are  unavailable  in  the  liberal  sense  of 
the  term;  the  case  is  in  effect  the  same  as  that  of  an  illegible  docu- 
ment, which  it  is  conceded  may  be  proved  by  copy. — Wigmore  on 
Evidence.  Vol.  I,  Sec.  797  (1904). 


88  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

any  question  in  which  depth  or  the  third  dimension 
must  be  considered,  such  as  writing  over  folds,  crossed 
line  inquiries,  questions  regarding  seals  or  any  impressed 
characters,  or  erasures  by  abrasion.  On  account  of  its 
slight  depth  of  focus  the  ordinary  microscope  may  be 
less  useful  in  these  inquiries,  and  in  such  cases  the  stereo- 
scopic instrument  often  will  demonstrate  clearly  what 
otherwise  cannot  be  proven. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

INSTRUMENTS   AND   APPLIANCES1 

Even  those  having  but  little  legal  experience  know 
that  the  usual  trial  of  an  issue  in  a  court  of  law  is  not 
exactly  a  proceeding  where  all  co-operate  to  discover 
and  show  the  existing  fact,  but  rather  that  such  a  con- 
test often  resolves  itself  into  a  fierce  controversy  be- 
tween those  who  seek  to  show  the  truth  and  those  who 
endeavor  to  hide  or  distort  it.  Under  these  conditions 
it  is  desirable  that  testimony  be  illustrated  and  enforced 
by  every  possible  means.  In  disputed  document  cases 
certain  instruments  may  in  this  connection  render  valu- 
able assistance  in  promoting  the  ends  of  justice. 

Unlike  many  subjects  calling  for  expert  testimony 
the  investigation  of  documents  presents  problems  which 
in  the  main  are  to  be  solved  by  the  study,  comparison 
and  interpretation  of  that  which  in  some  form  is  actually 
present  before  the  court.  The  problem  in  many  in- 
stances is  the  discovery  and  proof  of  a  physical  fact  and 
in  order  that  the  discovery  may  be  certain  and  the  proof 
convincing  every  instrument  and  appliance  should  be 
employed  that  will  assist  in  any  way.  That  technical 
testimony  which  is  based  upon  what  the  witness  alone 
knows  and  sees  is  not  usually  of  much  value  and  for 
this  reason  every  means  should  be  used  that  will  help  the 
court  and  jury  to  see  and  to  understand. 

^Portions  of  this  chapter  were  first  printed  in  the  Journal  of 
Weights  and  Measures,  Vol.  I.,  No.  4,  of  February,  1909,  and  these 
portions  are  reprinted  here  by  permission  of  the  publishers  of  that 
valuable  journal. 

[89] 


90  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

In  the  old  days  inquiries  regarding  documents  were 
surrounded  by  all  sorts  of  legal  restrictions,  but  more 
and  more  the  procedure  in  a  court  of  justice  not  only 
permits  but  encourages  the  clearest  exposition  of  the 
physical  basis  of  all  testimony.  As  already  briefly  sug- 
gested in  the  introduction  of  this  book,  this  practice  just 
so  far  removes  such  evidence  from  the  bare  statement 
of  an  opinion,  and  furnishes  the  facts  by  which  means  it 
becomes  possible  for  judge  and  jury  better  to  determine 
which  of  two  conflicting  contentions  is  the  correct  one. 

The  photographic  camera  and  the  microscope  most 
frequently  render  assistance  in  such  cases,  and  a  pre- 
sumptuous forgery  may  succeed  in  the  absence  of  these 
useful  instruments.  Their  various  uses  have  already 
been  outlined  and  these  descriptions  will  suggest  when 
they  may  be  employed  to  advantage.  Like  all  compli- 
cated tools,  they  may  be  of  but  little  use  in  the  hands 
of  the  unskilled,  but  properly  used  they  enable  even  the 
untrained  to  see,  interpret  and  understand  that  which 
otherwise  might  be  effectively  hidden. 

It  is  important  in  a  case  in  which  visual  testimony  is 
a  vital  factor  that  microscopes  and  magnifying  glasses 
of  varying  powers  be  provided  so  that  each  observer  may 
get  just  the  assistance  that  he  requires.  The  ability  to 
see  clearly  differs  greatly  in  different  individuals,  and 
it  may  happen  that  a  referee,  who  alone  considers  the 
testimony  and  decides  a  case,  or  a  juryman  whose  in- 
telligence gives  great  weight  to  his  opinion,  may  have 
peculiar  vision  and  may  need  special  aid.  Most  persons 
are  somewhat  sensitive  about  defective  vision,  or  may 
actually  be  unconscious  of  such  defect,  and  sometimes 
will  say  that  they  see  when  they  do  not  see  well;  the 


INSTRUMENTS  AND   APPLIANCES  91 

fullest  opportunity  should,  therefore,  be  given  to  each 
observer  to  use  the  magnifying  glass  that  is  best  suited 
to  his  eye,  that  he  may  be  sure  to  get  just  the  assistance 
that  he  needs. 

Ordinary  hand  magnifiers,  or  simple  microscopes,  as 
adjuncts  of  the  compound  microscope  are  often  of  great 


FIG.  39 — Box  of  hand   magnifiers   or   "simple   microscopes"    with 
powers  ranging  from  two  to  forty  diameters. 

assistance  and  should  always  be  at  hand  in  a  court  in- 
quiry ;  by  their  use  the  compound  microscope  can  be  dis- 
pensed with  in  many  investigations.  It  often  occurs 
also  that  some  member  of  a  jury,  as  already  suggested, 
may  receive  no  assistance  from  a  compound  microscope, 
and  with  such  an  observer  an  appropriate  hand  magni- 
fier may  show  effectively  what  is  to  be  proved. 

A  series  of  glasses,  as  illustrated  in  Fig.  89,  varying 
in  power  from  two  to  twenty  diameters,  will  afford 
valuable  assistance  in  nearly  every  inquiry.  Those  ad- 
vanced in  years  usually  do  best  with  glasses  mounted 


92  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

on  a  fixed  stand,  by  which  means  the  focal  distance  is 
mechanically  provided  for,  while  others  with  steady 
nerves  can  hold  a  glass  in  the  hand  and  thus  perhaps 
get  a  better  light  on  the  object  examined.  When  deli- 
cate color  values  are  under  examination  it  is  desirable 
to  use  glasses  in  which  the  chromatic  aberration  has  been 
corrected.  Magnifiers  of  this  class  usually  consist  of 
two  or  more  lenses  mounted  together  and  show  no  pris- 
matic or  incorrect  color  effects  even  at  the  margins  of  the 
field;  the  more  powerful  ones  are  made  as  small  as  of  a 
one-fourth  inch  focus  with  a  magnifying  power  of 
about  forty  diameters,  but  it  is  very  difficult  for  one 
without  experience  to  use  such  a  glass. 

The  ordinary  tripod-stand  glasses,  or  the  so-called 
linen  testers,  if  of  good  quality,  often  are  very  useful. 
When  both  hands  are  to  be  employed,  or  it  is  desirable 
to  shut  out  side  light  as  in  transmitted  light  examina- 
tions, a  watchmaker's  eyeglass  or  a  photographer's 
focusing  glass  can  be  used  to  advantage ;  but  for  general 
purposes  the  average  observer  can  use  to  best  advantage 
a  hand  magnifier  with  a  focus  of  about  one  inch. 

Accurate  measurements  that  can  be  proved  to  be  ac- 
curate are  of  vital  importance  in  connection  with  the 
investigation  of  certain  phases  of  the  subject  of  ques- 
tioned documents.  A  great  variety  of  questions  in  such 
cases  require  that  numerous  kinds  of  measurements  be 
made  as  a  definite  basis  for  certain  conclusions;  and  to 
avoid  possible  error  and  to  strengthen  testimony  it  is 
desirable  in  all  instances  that  measurements  be  made  so 
that  they  can  be  reviewed  and  verified  by  judge,  referee, 
or  jury.  In  order  that  this  may  be  possible  the  most 
suitable  instruments  must  be  provided. 


INSTRUMENTS  AND  APPLIANCES 


93 


In  alleged  traced  forgeries  it  often  becomes  necessary 
to  investigate  the  question  of  identity  in  size,  propor- 
tions and  position  of  the  various  parts  of  an  alleged 
model  signature  and  of  one  or  more  traced  imitations. 
Particularly  as  part  of  the  initial  investigation  in  such  a 
case,  or  for  final  use  for  illustrating  testimony,  it  is  very 
important  to  make  definite  measurements  of  the  various 
parts  to  be  compared  in  order  to  show  certain  exact 
identities  which  may  in  combination  be  very  strong 
evidence  of.  forgery. 

For  all  such  surface  measurements  finely  graduated 
glass  rules  are  best;  with  them  more  accurate  measure- 
ments can  be  made  because  the  graduations  can  be 


FIG.  40 — Four  inch  transparent  glass  rule  graduated  to  64ths,  32nds,  16ths, 
and  8ths  of  one  inch. 

brought  into  actual  contact  with  the  parts  to  be  measured 
as  cannot  be  done  with  the  ordinary  opaque  rule.  A 
convenient  and  accurate  form  of  this  kind  of  measure 
is  illustrated  in  Fig.  40.  This,  it  will  be  seen,  is  a  four 
inch  rule  graduated  in  8ths,  16ths,  32nds,  and  64ths  of 
an  inch.  This  arrangement  permits  measurement  from 
any  point  up  to  four  inches  into  the  finely  graduated 
field  and  for  many  purposes  is  more  convenient  than  a 
scale  marked  throughout  with  the  finest  graduations. 
With  a  scale  such  as  that  shown  it  is  possible  for  any- 


94  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

m^mmmt^fmm  one    with    average    eyesight    to 

1L"iL!ijaCI'nSSif  ,  . 

^ u^^  measure    accurately    up    to    its 

FIG.  4i-0ne-haif-inch  rule     finest  graduations  and  the  great 
on  glass  graduated  in          advantage  of  a  glass  rule  over 

256ths  of  inch. 

an  ordinary  measure  can  only  be 
appreciated  by  actual  comparison  of  the  two. 

Figure  41  shows  a  very  small  scale  on  glass,  one-half 
inch  in  length,  graduated  throughout  in  256ths,  and 
Fig.  42  shows  the  same  measure  photographed  over 


FIG.  42  -  Smith-Premier  and   Remington  small   r's  photographed 

under  Fig.  41  rule  to  show  differences  in  size.     Both 

enlarged  thirteen  and  one-half  diameters. 

two  typewritten  characters.  This  measure  is  very  use- 
ful in  typewriting  inquiries  or  any  investigation  in 
which  it  becomes  necessary  to  show  actual  but  minute 
differences  or  similarities.  The  scale  can  be  placed  over 
the  letter  or  part  under  investigation  and  photographed 
in  enlarged  form  as  shown.  In  the  illustration  the  dif- 
ference in  height  of  the  small  letters  on  the  Remington 
and  Smith-Premier  typewriters  is  clearly  seen.  The 
actual  difference  in  the  height  of  these  letters  is  only 
one  one-hundredth  of  an  inch. 

For  somewhat  longer  measurements  which  are  oc- 
casionally necessary  there  is  shown  in  Fig.  43  a  steel 


INSTRUMENTS  AND  APPLIANCES 


95 


rule  which  is  graduated  in  fourths  of  an  inch  except 
that  at  one  end  a  fourth  inch  space  is  graduated  in  hun- 
dredths  of  an  inch.  This  design  makes  it  possible  to 
measure  from  any  graduation  up  to  six  inches  into  the 
finely  graduated  space,  as  with  the  glass  rule.  By  the 
use  of  needle  pointed  parallel  dividers  very  accurate 


FIG.  43— Steel  rule  and  needle  pointed  parallel  dividers. 

measurements  can  be  made  with  this  scale  and  for  some 
purposes  it  is  very  useful.  That  illustrated  has  every 
graduation  throughout  its  whole  length  certified  by  the 
United  States  Bureau  of  Standards  to  be  accurate  with- 
in one  thousandth  of  an  inch.  Experienced  operators 
will,  of  course,  understand  the  necessity  of  using  with 
the  utmost  care  any  needle-pointed  dividers  on  a  dis- 
puted document,  and  unskilled  observers  should  not, 
under  any  circumstances,  be  permitted  to  use  such 
an  instrument  on  a  valuable  paper  that  is  under 
investigation. 


96 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


For  the  easy  measurement  of  line  widths,  shadings, 
pen  strokes,  and  for  some  other  occasional  uses,  the 
measure  illustrated  in  Fig.  44  is  useful.  This  measure, 
as  will  be  seen,  shows  numbered  lines  of  gradually  in- 
creasing width  which,  when  printed  up 
to  the  edge  of  a  sheet  of  paper,  permit 
the  various  lines  to  be  placed  directly 
over  other  lines  or  parts  which  are  to  be 
compared  or  measured.  By  the  use  of 
a  hand  magnifier  very  close  measure- 
ments or  accurate  comparisons  can  thus 
be  very  quickly  made.  The  printed 
measurements  of  the  widths  of  the 
numbered  lines  as  shown  in  the  illustra- 
tion reading  in  ten-thousandths  of  an 
inch,  were  made  with  the  Filar  Microm- 
eter which  is  hereafter  described.  The 
measurements  were  made  of  the  lines 
as  printed  on  enameled  paper,  and  one- 
eighth  of  an  inch  from  the  right  end  of 
the  strokes  where  the  lines  are  supposed 
to  be  cut  at  the  edge  of  the  sheet. 

A  convenient  measure  of  a  somewhat 
different  character  is  illustrated  in  Fig. 
45.  This  measure  shows  successive 
graduations  on  glass  inscribing  spaces 
each  of  which  from  the  smallest  is  one 
one-hundredth  of  an  inch  wider  than 
the  preceding  one.  With  such  an  in- 
strument it  is  possible  to  make  a  very 
quick  comparison  of  the  outside  meas- 
urements of  two  typewritten  or  printed 


1 
2 

3 
4 
5 
6 

7 
8 

9 
10 
11 
12 

13 
14 

15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 


.0256 
.024 


..0160 
.  .0138 
..0120 
..0105 
.  0000 
.  .0079 
.  .0070 
.0054 


FIG.  44— Line  meas- 
ure with  measure- 
ments as  made 
with  Filar  mi- 
crometer. 


INSTRUMENTS  AND  APPLIANCES 


97 


FIG.    45— Outside    measure    on    glas 
Each  division  T^  inch  wider 
than  preceding  one. 


FIG.  46 — Microm- 
eter Caliperwith 
illustration  of 
ratchet 
stop. 


FIG.  47— Special  Micrometer  Caliper  and  reduced  fac-simile  of  U.  S.  Bureau 
of  Standards  certificate. 


98  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

characters  or  of  a  line  or  any  small  object  within  the  field 
of  the  graduations. 

These  various  instruments  are  each  best  adapted  for 
certain  uses  and  are  also  useful  for  the  purpose  of  check- 
ing each  other  in  all  such  inquiries.  This  last  illustra- 
tion here  shown  ( Fig.  45 ),  as  in  the  case  with  the  others 
printed  herewith,  is  intended  to  be  correct  in  size,  but  it 
is  very  difficult,  in  fact  almost  impossible,  by  the  ordi- 
nary processes  of  reproduction  and  printing  to  secure 
absolute  accuracy  in  such  illustrations. 

For  some  paper  examinations  and  comparisons  the 
micrometer  caliper,  shown  in  Fig.  46,  is  very  useful. 
The  instrument  best  adapted  for  such  use  is  actuated 
by  a  ratchet  stop,  in  order  that  uniform  pressure  may 
be  mechanically  insured,  and  it  should  also  carry  a 
vernier  reading  up  to  ten-thousandths  of  an  inch.  With 
an  instrument  of  this  character  very  accurate  measure- 
ments of  thickness  can  be  made  and  it  is  usually  possible 
to  assort  papers  that  are  actually  different  by  the  thick- 
ness test  alone. 

Papers  range  in  thickness  all  the  way  from  the  thin- 
nest calendered  tissue,  which  is  in  thickness  about  .0009 
of  an  inch,  up  to  heavy  note  paper  which  is  about  .007 
of  an  inch  in  thickness.  This  makes  a  range  of  thick- 
nesses, if  measured  in  thousandths,  of  about  sixty. 

There  is  shown  in  Fig.  47  a  special  micrometer 
caliper,  made  by  Brown  &  Sharpe  from  a  special  design, 
which  carries  two  parallel  knife-edge  jaws  neither  of 
which  revolves.  This  instrument  measures  surface  dis- 
tances within  its  field  with  great  accuracy  and  con- 
venience and  also  serves  to  prove  or  check  measure- 
ments made  in  other  ways.  In  a  critical  comparison  of 


INSTRUMENTS   AND   APPLIANCES 


99 


typewriting  this  in- 
strument is  very  use- 
ful, serving  to  meas- 
ure the  impression 
as  well  as  the  type 
itself.  It  can  readily 
be  seen  that  the 
ordinary  caliper  writh 
one  round  revolving 
point  of  contact,  can- 
not be  used  conveni- 
ently for  such  sur- 
face measurements. 
The  screw  thread  of 
this  instrument  as  well  as  of  that  shown  in  Fig.  46  has 
been  certified  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Stand- 
ards to  be  correct  to  one  ten-thousandth  of  an  inch.  The 
vernier  on  these  and  other  instruments  described  in  this 
chapter  is  illustrated  in  Fig.  48  and  explained  in  the 
footnote. 

For  the  finest  measurements,  such  as  are  required  in 
critical  examinations  of  line  widths,  as  may  be  necessary 


FIG.  48  —Illustration  of  Vernier  set  at  naught 
and  the  same  moved  five  and  seven- 
tenths  divisions. 


lrThe  Vernier  is  an  instrument,  or  method  of  graduating  instru- 
ments of  many  kinds,  named  from  its  inventor,  Pierre  Vernier,  a  native 
of  France.  The  device  is  designed  to  measure  a  fractional  part  of 
one  of  the  equal  divisions  of  a  graduated  scale.  The  vernier  scale, 
as  shown  in  the  above  illustration,  divides  nine  of  the  primary  or  regu- 
lar divisions  into  ten  equal  parts  so  that  each  line  of  the  vernier,  after 
the  first  set  at  zero,  is  1-10  of  a  division  shorter  or  narrower  than  the 
primary  divisions.  The  advantage  of  the  vernier  consists  in  the  fact 
that  any  part  or  proportion  of  one  of  the  primary  divisions  is  read  off 
by  simply  observing  which  division  of  the  vernier  after  the  first  ex- 
actly coincides  with  one  of  the  divisions  on  the  regular  scale.  In  the 
illustration  it  will  be  seen  that  the  seventh  division  of  the  vernier  is 
in  line  with  one  of  the  divisions  of  the  primary  or  main  scale. 

The  primary  scale  on  the  Micrometer  Calipers,  illustrated  herewith, 
represents  one  thousandth  of  an  inch,  so  that  the  reading  in  the  il- 
lustration would  be  five  thousandths  and  seven  ten-thousandths  of  an 
inch. 


100 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  49 — Filar  Micrometer,  showing  graduated  indi- 
cator wheel. 

in  examining  an  alleged  fraudulent  interlineation,  and 
also  for  pen  comparisons,  or  for  any  very  fine  and  ac- 
curate measurement,  the  microscope  fitted  with  the  filar 
micrometer  is  indispensable.  The  instrument,  as  illus- 
trated in  Fig.  49,  easily  measures  to  a  fineness  of  ten 
thousandths  of  an  inch  so  that  even  an  unskilled  and 
inexperienced  observer  can  see  and  verify  the  measure- 
ment. 

Comparative  measurements  can  be  made  with  the 
instrument  by  simply  reading  off  the  number  of  divi- 
sions indicated  on  the  graduated  wheel,  but  to  reduce 
the  measurements  to  fractions  of  an  inch  or  fractions 
of  a  meter  it  is  necessary  to  employ  a  stage  micrometer, 
which  is  a  glass  ruled  accurately  in  hundredths  and 
thousandths  of  an  inch  or  in  fractions  of  a  meter.  These 
graduations  are  examined  in  the  microscope  and  it  is 
observed  how  many  points  on  the  graduated  wheel  of 
the  filar  micrometer  are  required  to  move  the  spider 
web  line  over  one  of  the  graduated  spaces  on  the  stage 
micrometer,  as  described  more  fully  in  footnote  on  page 
82.  Under  high  magnification  a  greater  number  of 


INSTRUMENTS  AND  APPLIANCES  101 

revolutions  are,  of  course,  necessary  than  under  low 
magnification  and  for  this  reason  the  stage  micrometer 
is  necessary  when  it  is  desirable  to  make  the  measure- 
ments definite.  Stage  micrometers  are  also  certified 
by  the  Bureau  of  Standards. 

Illustrated  in  the  chapter  treating  of  slant  in  writing 
is  shown  a  special  protractor  designed  for  the  easy  and 
accurate  measuring  of  the  slant  of  writing.  This  in- 
strument is  also  made  on  glass  so  that  the  graduations 
can  be  brought  into  actual  contact  with  the  line  meas- 
ured and  photographed  with  it  if  this  is  desirable.  It 
is  a  tedious  and  difficult  process  to  read  the  slant  of  the 
short  fine  lines  of  writing,  with  the  ordinary  commercial 
protractor.  The  instrument  illustrated  easily  reads  to 
one-half  of  a  degree. 

Another  protractor  which  is  sometimes  useful  is 
illustrated  in  the  chapter  on  typewriting  and  is  designed 
to  show  the  slight  abnormal  slant  of  certain  letters  in 
typewriting.  This  delicate  but  fixed  divergence  in 
slant  is  one  of  the  numerous  individualities  in  type- 
written work  which  in  sufficient  combination  identify  a 
piece  of  typewriting  with  absolute  certainty.  This 
protractor  which  reads  five  degrees  each  side  of  the 
vertical  is  on  glass  so  that  it  can  be  put  over  the  letters 
and  both  photographed  together  in  enlarged  form. 

Another  test  instrument  for  typewriting  examinations 
is  also  illustrated  in  the  typewriting  chapter  and  consists 
of  a  glass  carrying  accurately  ruled  squares  and  rectan- 
gles, ten  to  the  inch,  the  spacing  of  ordinary  typewriting, 
so  that  it  can  be  placed  over  the  typewriting  to  discover 
and  illustrate  abnormal  alignment,  which  is  always  one 
of  the  significant  individual  peculiarities  of  typewriting. 


102 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Another  test  glass  useful  in  the  examination  of 
alleged  traced  forgeries  is  shown  in  Fig.  50.  This  is  a 
glass  with  uniform  squares  that  can  be  placed  over  an 
alleged  forgery  and  a  model  from  which  it  was  traced, 
or  over  two  alleged  tracings  from  the  same  original, 


i 

2, 

a 

if 

$ 

(. 

~t 

ff 

<\ 

10 

ii 

L2i 

13 

14 

15 

ii 

'7 

[2 

[<\ 

2-0 

*l 

AX 

J\ 

33 

C 

J3 

IE 

F 

G 

H 

r 

j 

K 

L 

M 

N 

'IG.  50  —  Illustration  of  ruled  squares  for  comparison  of  alleged  traced  forge  rie 

to  show  suspicious  identities  that  may  exist.  Any  part 
of  either  signature  can  be  compared  with  a  correspond- 
ing part  of  the  other  signature  by  observing  where  the 
line  cuts  the  square.  This  glass  can  also  be  photo- 
graphed over  the  signatures  to  make  a  permanent  illus- 
tration as  shown  in  Fig.  51. 

Still  another  instrument  useful  in  many  document  in- 
vestigations is  the  color  microscope,  an  instrument 
designed  for  the  comparison,  measurement  and  record- 
ing in  fixed  terms  of  color  sensations.  Many  occasions 
arise  in  the  examination  of  questioned  documents  for 


INSTRUMENTS  AND  APPLIANCES 


103 


FIG.  51 — Three  sets  of  three  each  of  traced  forgeries  photographed  with  ruled 

squares  to  show  identities  in  size,  spacing,  position  and  shape  of 

letters.   From  case  of  Fidelity  Trust  Co.  (Buffalo, 

N.  Y.)  vs.  Executors  Lydia  Cox  Estate. 

the  use  of  such  an  instrument  and  without  it  the  facts 
in  some  cases  cannot  be  clearly  shown.  The  instrument 
is  useful  in  all  ink  investigations,  and,  as  briefly  out- 
lined in  the  previous  chapter,  is  useful  in  the  early  ex- 
amination of  a  fraudulent  document  purporting  to  be 
some  years  of  age,  which  in  fact  has  been  recently 
written  and  on  which  the  ink  has  not  yet  matured  and 
reached  its  ultimate  intensity  of  color.  If  such  a  docu- 
ment is  promptly  examined  and  a  definite  record  is 
made  of  the  exact  tint  and  shade  of  the  ink,  as  may  be 
seen  and  verified  by  competent  observers,  comparisons 


104  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

can  then  be  made  later  and  any  change  in  the  ink  can 
be  clearly  seen  and  noted. 

A  decided  change  and  blackening  within  a  period  of 
a  few  weeks  of  an  ordinary  iron-nutgall  ink  on  a  docu- 
ment purporting  to  be  several  years  of  age,  indicates 
unmistakably  that  such  a  document  is  not  as  old  as  it 
purports  to  be.  This  test  alone,  if  promptly  and  proper- 
ly made  and  verified,  is  sufficient  in  many  cases  to  prove 
that  a  document  is  fraudulent.  The  color  microscope 
is  illustrated  and  more  fully  described  in  the  chapter 
on  ink. 

Beam  dividers  (Fig.  21)  carrying  parallel  points  are 
very  useful  for  general  measurements  as  well  as  in 
determining  the  degree  of  photographic  enlargement 
by  measuring  the  ground-glass  image  as  already  illus- 
trated. More  accurate  measurements  for  any  purpose 
can  be  made  with  parallel  pointed  dividers  than  with  the 
ordinary  jointed  compasses. 

In  the  chapter  on  photography  are  described  numer- 
ous appliances,  useful  in  connection  with  that  special 
work,  which  may  also  become  useful  in  connection 
with  certain  other  phases  of  questioned  document 
investigations. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY,  AND  ALIGNMENT  IN  WRITING 

In  this  and  the  chapters  immediately  following  the 
more  important  features  of  handwriting  are  discussed 
somewhat  in  detail  with  a  view  of  describing  and  classi- 
fying those  that  in  the  main  constitute  handwriting 
individuality  and  have  most  value  in  a  handwriting  in- 
vestigation. Every  element  or  quality  of  handwriting 
may  have  some  value  as  a  means  of  identifying  it  and 
the  recognition,  comparison  and  correct  interpretation  of 
all  these  various  qualities  are  what  constitute  the  theory 
and  practice  of  scientific  handwriting  examination. 

If  we  may  use  the  broad  definition  of  the  word  char- 
acteristic as  "that  which  distinguishes  or  helps  to  dis- 
tinguish," then  we  may  describe  the  varying  constit- 
uents of  a  handwriting  as  its  characteristics.  A  hand- 
writing characteristic,  then,  is  anything  about  it  that 
serves  to  identify  it  in  any  way  or  in  any  degree.  These 
constituents  of  handwriting  may  vary  greatly  in  signifi- 
cance, the  gradations  ranging  from  those  common  to 
all  writing  in  the  same  language  up  through  the  various 
steps  to  the  unique,  individual  characteristics  of  a 
particular  writer. 

As  is  well  known  handwriting  shows  great  variety  in 
speed  and  muscular  skill,  ranging  all  the  way  from  the 
clumsy  hesitation  of  the  illiterate  and  the  palsied  feeble- 
ness of  age  up  to  the  skillful  dash  and  grace  of  the 
adept.  Modern  writing  in  all  its  great  variety  is,  there- 

[105] 


106  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

fore,  far  from  being  a  mere  dead  combination  of  out- 
lines of  conventional  forms,  like  carved  inscriptions  on 
a  monument,  but  always  has  about  it  that  which  points 
to  the  manner  in  which  it  was  produced.  There  are  as 
wide  differences  in  manner  of  writing  as  in  the  form1. 

Writing  is  in  reality  the  track  or  visible  record  of  a 
movement  and  necessarily  is  greatly  changed  when  pro- 
duced in  a  different  manner,  and  a  thorough  study  of 
any  writing  must  necessarily  give  attention  to  this 
fundamental  question.  As  a  rule  fraudulent  writing 
is  very  defective  in  this  matter  of  movement  because 
such  writing  is  mainly  an  imitation  of  certain  forms, 
without  due  consideration  of  the  manner  by  which  they 
were  actually  produced. 

Free,  natural  writing  is  the  almost  unconscious  visible 
expression  of  firmly  established  muscular  habits  based 
on  fixed  mental  impressions  of  certain  forms  or  outlines. 
These  muscular  habits,  as  well  as  the  mental  patterns, 
differ  in  a  marked  manner  in  different  individuals  and 
this  variation  radically  affects  the  visible  result.  The 
forger  usually  acts  on  the  false  assumption  that  all  writ- 
ings are  produced  in  the  same  manner  and  differ  only 
in  design  of  letters. 

The  principal  so-called  movements  in  writing  are 
described  as  the  finger  movement,  the  hand  movement, 
the  forearm  •  movement,  the  whole-arm  movement  and 
their  various  combinations.  These  movements  are  em- 


xThe  way  in  which  one  writes  will  be  determined  in  a  measure  by 
the  materials  which  he  uses  and  by  the  strength  and  shape  of  his 
muscles.  But  these  are  very  secondary  factors.  The  chief  considera- 
tion is  the  nervous  organization  which  controls  the  co-ordination  of 
the  muscles.  In  other  words,  one's  individual  writing  is  the  expression 
of  his  individual  habit  of  movement. — Prof.  Charles  Hubbard  Judd, 
of  University  of  Chicago,  in  Genetic  Psychology,  Chapter  VI.,  p.  169. 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        107 

ployed  at  greatly  differing  degrees  of  speed  and  skill  by 
different  writers  and  make  all  together  a  great  variety 
of  movement  habits. 

The  finger  movement  is  that  method  of  writing  in 
which  the  letters  are  made  almost  entirely  by  the  action 
of  the  thumb  and  the  first  and  second  fingers,  the  actual 
motion  extending  to  the  second  and  slightly  to  the  third 
joints.  This  is  the  movement  employed  by  children  and 
illiterates  and  generally  by  those  with  whom  writing  is 
an  unfamiliar  process.  Most  of  the  new  "vertical  writ- 
ing" is  produced  by  this  movement.  The  finger  move- 
ment gives  but  little  freedom  of  any  kind  and  especially 
but  very  slight  lateral  freedom,  and  when  such  writing 
is  hurried  it  degenerates  into  the  very  poorest  kind  of 
writing.  Finger  movement  writing  shows  lack  of  clear- 
cut,  smooth  strokes  and  contains  numerous  broad  curves, 
but  is  marked  by  somewhat  irregular  connections  be- 
tween letters  and  parts  of  letters  and  is  usually  slow  and 
labored.  It  is  the  movement  nearly  always  employed  in 
forged  writing. 

Hand  movement  writing  is  that  produced  in  most 
part  by  the  action  of  the  hand  as  a  whole  with  the  wrist 
as  a  center  of  action,  but  with  slight  action  of  the  fingers. 
Much  of  the  illegible,  scratchy,  angular  writing  written 
by  women  is  produced  by  the  hand  movement.  With 
this  movement  the  paper  is  often  held  in  such  a  position 
that  the  lateral  or  side  to  side  movement  of  the  hand  is 
in  a  direct  line  with  the  slant  of  the  letters.  With  this 
position  and  this  movement  the  connections  at  the  tops 
and  bottoms  of  letters  are  very  narrow  or  angular  and 
the  writing  is  often  very  illegible  although  it  may  be 
very  rapid.  The  alignment  of  writing  of  this  kind  is 


108  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

very  uneven  and  many  words  have  an  upward  tendency. 

What  is  known  as  the  forearm  or  muscular  move- 
ment really  comes  from  the  shoulder,  but  is  the  move- 
ment of  the  hand  and  arm  with  the  arm  supported  by 
the  desk  on  the  muscular  portion  of  the  forearm  with 
the  elbow  as  the  center  of  lateral  motion.  It  is  possible 
to  write  entirely  with  the  forearm  movement  without 
any  separate  action  of  the  hand  and  fingers,  and  many 
superior  penmen  write  in  this  manner,  but  the  easiest, 
most  rapid  and  most  perfect  writing  is  that  produced 
with  the  forearm  movement  used  in  connection  with  a 
slight  action  of  the  hand  and  fingers  by  which  the  small 
parts  of  the  writing  are  produced. 

Forearm  movement  writing  shows  smooth,  clearcut, 
rapid  strokes  and  is  the  style  of  writing  that  is  forged 
with  greatest  difficulty  for  the  reason  that  the  method 
by  which  it  is  produced  is  the  farthest  removed  from 
that  slow,  drawing  motion  employed  in  carefully  fol- 
lowing a  copy.  Forearm  movement  writing  usually 
shows  a  uniform  base  line  and  gives  great  command  of 
hand  and  the  most  complete  lateral  freedom. 

The  whole-arm  movement  in  writing  is  the  action  of 
the  entire  arm  without  rest.  In  the  forearm  movement 
it  is  obvious  that  the  motion  and  its  source  are  nearly  the 
same  as  in  the  whole-arm  movement,  but  the  forearm 
rests  on  a  support  of  desk  or  table.  This  rest  restricts 
somewhat  the  extent  of  the  movement  but  with  such  sup- 
port the  movement  is  under  much  better  control.  The 
whole-arm  movement  is  employed  in  very  large  writing, 
in  ornamental  penmanship,  in  blackboard  writing  and 
by  a  few  writers  in  making  all  the  capital  letters. 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        109 

The  distinguishing  difference  between  writing  and 
printing  is  that  in  writing  the  letters  in  words  are  con- 
nected with  each  other.  Originally  writings  were  most- 
ly what  would  now  be  called  pen-printing,  all  the  char- 
acters being  made  separately,  but  as  writing  became 
more  common  and  the  necessity  for  ease  and  speed  in- 
creased the  characters  were  connected.  This  manner 
of  writing  made  a  new  requirement  in  the  process,  that 
of  locomotion,  or  the  ability  to  move  the  hand  along  as 
the  letters  were  made  in  succession.  In  this  manner  the 
slope  of  writing  to  the  right  was  developed  and  there 
arose  the  necessity  for  developing  what  are  described 
as  writing  movements  as  compared  with  the  printing 
movement  used  to  make  detached  letters. 

Finger  movement  writing,  especially  as  taught  in  the 
new  vertical  writing,  is  essentially  a  printing  move- 
ment which  permits  of  the  formation  of  but  a  few 
characters  without  a  readjustment  of  the  arm  and  a 
new  start.  Hand  movement  gives  somewhat  more 
lateral  freedom  while  forearm  movement  carries  the 
hand  along  from  letter  to  letter,  keeping  Ihe  hand,  arm 
and  fingers  in  the  same  relation  to  each  other  and  per- 
mitting the  use  of  the  fingers  and  hand  for  the  forma- 
tion of  the  small  parts  of  the  letters,  and  allowing  that 
freedom,  ease  and  force  which  are  always  characteristics 
of  the  best  writing. 

The  various  movements  already  described  are  each 
employed  with  a  great  variation  in  skill  by  different 
writers  and  a  general  classification  may  assist  in  mak- 
ing an  analysis  of  this  particular  phase  of  the  writing 
process.  Under  this  head  (Fig.  52)  five  classes  can 
readily  be  distinguished:  (1)  clumsy,  illiterate  and  halt- 


110 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


ing;  (2)  hesitating  and  painful  through  weakness  or 
disease;  (3)  nervous  and  irregular;  (4)  strong,  heavy, 
forceful;  (5)  smooth,  easy,  flowing  and  rapid. 

Under  the  head  of  speed  alone  four  divisions  can 
also  be  made:     (1)    slow  and  drawn;    (2)    deliberate; 

(3)  average;  (4) 
rapid.  It  is  obvious 
that  the  fourth 
division  under 
speed  might  ac- 
company the  third 
division  under 
movement.  These 
descriptions  are 
necessarily  of  a 
very  general  char- 
acter, but  are  of 
value  in  so  far  as 
they  assist  in  call- 
ing attention  to 
every  element  of 
the  writing  habit. 
The  degree  of 
skill  shown  in  one 
writing  may  be  so  superior  to  that  shown  in  another  that 
the  difference  is  as  irreconcilable  as  the  most  radical  dif- 
ferences in  form.  This  question  must  be  studied  with 
especial  care  at  the  beginning  of  all  anonymous  letter 
inquiries  or  in  any  investigation  in  which  a  writing  is 
examined  primarily  as  a  means  of  identifying  some 
person.  It  is  obvious  that  a  disguised  hand  would  not 
show  greater  writing  ability  than  the  natural  hand  of 


FIG.    52  —  Five   examples    of    movement.      All 
taken  from  business  envelope  addresses. 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        111 


the  same  writer  nor 
a  freehand  forgery  show 
more  skill  with  the  pen 
than  the  alleged  forger 
possesses. 

The  different  move- 
ments employed  affect 
writing  in  different 
ways  and  change  or 
modify  the  smoothness, 
directness,  uniformity 
and  continuity  of  the 
strokes  and  also  not- 
ably modify  the  con- 
necting turns  or  curves 
between  letters  and 
parts  of  letters.  Un- 
skillful writing  is  pro- 
duced by  a  disconnect- 
ed and  broken  move- 
ment and  to  produce 
practically  the  same 
form  requires  many 
more  disconnected  or 
interrupted  motions  or 
movement  impulses 
than  skillful  writing. 
In  the  writing  of  a 
single  signature  one 
writer  may  actually 
make  fifty  distinct 

movement  "  imrml  <SP<J       FlG'  53— Part  of  genuine  letter  and  similar 
.nt     impulses  part  of  a  traced  signature.     From 

(Fig.    53),    which    Can  Rice-Patrick  case,  New  York. 


112 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  54 — Two  genuine  letters   from  model  signature  and  two  traced  imitations, 

showing  slow,  hesitating,  drawing  movement.    See  especially  top  of  last  capital  H. 

From  exhibits  in  case  of  Essenhower  vs.  Messchert  Estate,  Reading,  Pa.  (1907). 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        113 

be  counted  in  the  written  result,  while  another  writer  in 
producing  the  same  letters  with  the  same  number  of  pen- 
lifts,  may  make  only  twenty-five  distinct  motions.  This 
marks  a  distinction  in  two  writings  even  more  funda- 
mental than  divergences  in  form. 


FIG.  55—  Natural  tremor,  most  pronounced  on  downward  strokes 
and  absent  from  some  upward  strokes  and  from  final  flourish. 

A  free  uninterrupted  stroke  or  motion  makes  a 
smooth,  continuous  curved  or  straight  line  while  a 
change  of  direction,  tremor,  or  unevenness  in  the  inter- 
mediate part  of  what  ordinarily  is  a  single  stroke  in- 
dictates  a  hesitation  or  changing  movement  impulse1. 
Study  of  the  strokes  or  separated  pen  lines  themselves 
in  a  writing  will  show  with  what  speed  and  force  it  was 


xAn  excellent  example  of  hesitating,  changing  movement  impulses 
is  shown  in  the  enlargement  of  the  downward  stroke  of  one  of  the 
capital  "M's"  from  one  of  the  court  exhibits  of  the  Rice-Patrick  (New 
York)  case  will  signature  (Fig.  53).  A  straight  line  is  drawn  each  side 
of  the  stroke  to  show  more  clearly  its  character.  The  four  forged 
signatures  in  the  case  were  undoubtedly  traced  from  one  model  and 
contained  many  strokes  like  that  shown.  Hold  the  book  with  the  paper 
nearly  flat  so  that  it  is  possible  to  look  lengthwise  of  the  illustration 
when  it  will  be  seen  that  this  line  from  one  of  the  signatures  could 
only  have  been  produced  by  a  slow,  hesitating,  drawing  movement. 
This  same  condition  is  shown  in  numerous  parts  of  the  two  traced  imi- 
tations shown  in  Fig.  54,  taken  from  exhibits  in  a  similar  case.  If  the 
lines  are  followed  through  with  a  dry  pen  it  will  be  seen  how  from 
the  lines  themselves  the  manner  of  writing  is  unmistakably  shown. 


114 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  56  —  Simulated   tremor   and   blunt    ended 

strokes  showing  slow  drawing  movement1. 

From  exhibit  in  case  of  Newcomb  vs. 

Burbank,  (1909)  New  York  City. 


written.  A  straight 
line  is  not  only  the 
shortest  distance  be- 
tween two  points 
but  also  the  quick- 
est distance,  and  the 
line  quality  of  writ- 
ing always  indicates 
the  speed,  force  and 
freedom  with  which 
it  was  produced. 

The  connecting 
upward  strokes  are 
especially  signifi- 
cant for  the  com- 
parison of  move- 
ment impulses,  as 
such  strokes  show 
the  propulsive  pow- 
er of  the  writer.  In 
genuine  writing  the 
upward  strokes,  or 
some  of  them  at 
least,  are  usually 
produced  with  more 
smoothness  and 
freedom  than  the 
downward  strokes, 
and  just  the  oppo- 


site condition  may  be  found  in  fraudulent  writing. 

lrThe  tables  of  enlarged  terminals  and  "t"  crossings  taken  from  the 
admitted  writings  of  the  parties,  show  a  very  marked  difference;  those 
of  the  defendant  being  blunt  or  clubbed  at  the  latter  end  while  those 
of  the  plaintiff  are  generally  lighter  and  invariably  pointed  or  taper- 
ing at  the  termination. — Sharon  vs.  Hill,  26  Fed.  Rep.  358  (1885). 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        115 


Q. 


it 


When  a  word  is 
completed  in  free 
natural  writing 
the  pen  is  usually 
raised  from  the 
paper  while  in  mo- 
tion, and  with 
many  writers  the 
motion  also  slight- 
ly precedes  the 
putting  of  the  pen 
on  the  paper  at  the 
beginning,  so  that 
the  strokes  at  the 
beginning  and 
ends  of  words 
gradually  diminish 
or  taper  to  a  van- 
ishing point. 

In  simulated 
writing  produced 

by  a  slow    drawing"  *IG'  57 — ^en  diameter  Camera  Lucida  enlarge- 

.  ments  of  first  five  word  terminals  of  Fig. 

motion  With  the  at-  56.    Divergence  in  direction  as  well 

. .  ,  as  form  of  finish  is  shown. 

tention  almost  en- 
tirely directed  to  the  matter  of  form,  the  lines  will  often 
have  blunt,  stubbed  ends  (Figs.  56,  57),  showing  the 
stopping  of  the  motion  with  the  stroke  itself  and  then 
the  raising  of  the  pen.  The  questioned  and  standard 
writing  in  any  case  should  always  be  carefully  ex- 
amined under  considerable  magnification  with  this  point 
in  mind. 

In  genuine  writing  there  are  certain  natural  places 


116  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

for  the  pen  to  hesitate  or  even  stop,  but  in  forged  or 
fraudulent  writing,  which  is  usually  produced  by  a 
drawing  movement,  such  movement  may  show  discon- 
nection or  hesitation  at  any  point  on  upward  or  down- 
ward strokes  or  even  in  the  middle  of  what  are  natural- 
ly continuous  strokes. 

In  examining  a  questioned  signature  the  separate 
movements  or  impulses  required  to  produce  the  genuine 
and  questioned  writing  should,  as  already  suggested,  be 
carefully  counted  and  compared,  and  the  exact  points 
or  places  in  the  two  writings  where  stops  or  hesitation 
is  shown  should  be  examined  with  the  utmost  care  and 
thoroughness.  A  drawn  signature  will  almost  inevitably 
show  significant  divergences  and  inconsistencies,  and  al- 
so stops  and  joinings  in  unnatural  places.  Greatly  en- 
larged photographs  showing  the  utmost  detail  of  the 
original  writing  are  almost  indispensable  for  thorough 
examinations  of  this  character. 

Genuine  writing,  even  when  showing  much  tremor, 
will  usually  show  some  free  strokes  made  by  the  momen- 
tum of  the  hand,  while  drawn  fraudulent  writing,  even 
though  quite  perfect  in  general  form,  may  show  but 
little  if  any  such  freedom  and  will  often  show  hesitation 
at  the  wrong  places  and  tremor  wrongly  placed.  When, 
however,  the  writing  imitated  is  excessively  weak  and 
hesitating  the  imitation  may  in  some  parts  exaggerate 
the  tremor  and  in  other  parts  show  an  inconsistent 
strength  and  firmness  that  indicate  that  the  writing  is 
not  genuine. 

Line  quality  in  writing  is  dependent  upon  the  writ- 
ing instrument,  the  writing  surface,  the  relation  of  the 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        117 

writing  instrument  to  the  writing  surface,  the  muscu- 
lar skill  or  hand  control  of  the  writer  and  the  manner 
of  writing  or  movement  employed.  Deviations  from 
uniform  strokes,  ordinarily  called  tremors,  which  are 
apparent  without  magnification,  may  be  due  to  lack  of 
skill  on  the  part  of  the  writer,  self -consciousness  of  the 
writing  process,  or  the  hesitation  which  is  the  result  of 
copying  or  imitating.  Lack  of  smoothness  or  tremor 
may  be  due  to  uncontrollable  nervousness  on  the  part  of 
the  writer,  or,  in  illiterate  writing,  to  clumsiness  or 
hesitation  due  to  a  lack  of  a  clear  mental  impression  of 
the  form  which  is  being  made.  Tremor  of  age,  of 
illiteracy  and  of  weakness  are  not  always  distinguish- 
able from  each  other,  but  can  usually  be  distinguished 
from  tremor  of  fraud. 

If  standard  writing  is  smooth  and  strong  and  shows 
no  tremulous  strokes  then,  of  course,  the  presence  of 
any  tremor  whatever  in  an  alleged  forgery  is  very  sus- 
picious in  itself  and  such  tremor  may  be  very  strong 
evidence  of  forgery. 

The  characteristics  of  tremor  of  fraud  as  distinguished 
from  other  tremor  are  inequality  in  movement  at  any 
place  in  a  stroke  or  line,  with  lines  too  strong  and  vigor- 
ous combined  with  weak  hesitating  strokes;  also  fre- 
quent interruptions  in  movement,  unequal  distribution 
of  ink  on  upward  as  well  as  downward  strokes,  and 
especially  the  varying  pen  pressure  due  to  change  in 
speed  and  interruptions  in  movement  which  may  occur 
in  the  middle  of  direct  curves  or  even  straight  lines. 
Such  forged  writing  may  lack  the  necessary  uniformity 
with  itself  and  thus  contains  evidences  of  unnaturalness 
that  indicate  a  lack  of  genuineness  without  compari- 


118  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

son  with  any  other  writing  whatever.  This  result  is 
often  particularly  apparent  where  the  forger  attempts 
to  simulate  tremor  of  weakness. 

Two  very  significant  parts  of  a  signature  or  any 
writing  are  the  first  and  last  strokes  of  words  and  sep- 
arate capital  letters.  If  evidences  of  attention  to  the 


FIG.  58 — Terminal  of  questioned  signature  showing  changing  pressure,  significant 
hesitation  on  last  stroke  and  also  blunt  ending. 

process  of  writing  and  inequalities  in  pen  pressure  and 
movement  continue  to  the  very  end  of  the  last  unim- 
portant stroke  of  the  word  (Fig.  58)  or  letter  this 
usually  indicates  a  self -consciousness  of  the  writing 
process  which  may  be  a  strong  indication  of  forgery, 
and  if  the  very  beginning  of  the  signature  also  shows 
hesitation  and  changes  of  direction  inconsistent  with 
the  standard  signatures,  such  unnatural  condition  is 
strong  evidence  of  a  drawing  movement  instead  of  a 
writing  movement. 

Characteristic  tremor  of  age  or  extreme  weakness 
usually  shows  unusual  and  erratic  departures  of  the  line 
from  its  intended  course,  abrupt  recovery,  and  a  general 
indication  of  weakness  or  of  movements  beyond  the  con- 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        119 

trol  of  the  writer,  particularly  in  downward  strokes. 
Such  writing  frequently  shows  awkward  digressions  or 
distortions,  which  may  be  due  to  imperfect  sight,  and 
general  irregularity  caused  by  involuntary  tremors,  and 
it  is  often  characterized  by  abbreviations  or  even  omis- 
sions of  letters  or  parts  of  letters. 


FIG.  59 — Portion  of  forged  signature  showing  two  suspicious  joinings,  before  and 
after  small  "n,"  and  obtuse  angles  in  final  curve  after  small  "r." 

Signatures  showing  tremor  of  age  often  show  very 
uneven  alignment  and  may  disregard  entirely  a  line  near  x 
which  they  are  written,  especially  if  such  line  is  indis- 
tinct. Toward  the  end  such  signatures  sometimes  show 
apparent  impatience  and  the  desire  to  complete  what 
may  be  a  disagreeable  and  perhaps  a  very  painful  act, 
and  the  concluding  parts  may  be  made  with  a  nervous 
haste  and  may  be  much  distorted.  Even  the  most  clumsy 
genuine  signature  will  usually  show  occasional  careless, 
unconscious  strokes  while  a  forgery  is  often  most  care- 
fully drawn  from  beginning  to  end.  Old  age  writing  *>- 
indicating  a  lack  of  muscular  control  does  not  usually 
show  fine  continuous  hair  lines,  but  many  strokes  are 
usually  made  with  considerable  pressure. 


120  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Natural  tremor,  being  involuntary,  is  apt  to  be  com- 
paratively uniform  on  similar  parts  and  a  forger  may 
fail  in  showing  too  many  or  too  few  tremors.  A  forged 
signature  purporting  to  be  written  by  an  old  man  with 
a  trembling  hand  sometimes  contains  delicate  and  un- 
necessary retouching  and  repairing  of  fine  lines  which 
mark  it  as  undoubtedly  spurious.  Such  delicate  correc- 
tions are  inconsistent  with  genuineness  in  any  writing, 
and  in  some  cases  may  be  conclusive  evidence  of  forgery 
because  it  would  have  been  physically  impossible  for  the 
aged  writer  with  a  feeble  hand  and  poor  sight  to  make 
the  repairs  which  appear  in  the  questioned  signature. 
In  his  tense  anxiety  for  a  perfect  result  the  forger  is 
very  apt  to  be  dissatisfied  with  his  work  as  first  produced 
and  often  attempts  to  perfect  it  by  careful  overwrit- 
ing and  retouching,  thus  marking  it  as  unquestionably 
fraudulent. 

Tremor  of  extreme  weakness  and  tremor  of  age  have 
many  similar  characteristics,  and  cannot  always  be  dis- 
tinguished from  each  other,  but  even  the  most  feeble 
genuine  writing  usually  has  about  it  a  certain  careless- 
ness or  abandon  that  marks  it  as  genuine,  while  tremor 
of  fraud  shows  a  painstaking  and  unnatural  care 
throughout  that  indicates  an  effort  to  follow  an  un- 
familiar copy1. 

:The  signature,  on  its  face,  independent  of  any  other  consideration 
is,  without  any  question,  suspicious.  Even  when  considering  this 
signature  in  the  most  favorable  light  in  connection  with  the  other  evi- 
dence in  the  case,  tending  to  show  that  the  decedent  intended  to  make 
testamentary  provision  for  the  proponent,  it  nevertheless  stands  out 
as  a  silent,  emphatic  denial  of  genuineness.  A  person  may  write 
poorly  at  times,  when  his  signature  does  not  resemble  his  usual  style 
of  writing,  perhaps,  but  there  is  a  built  up,  mechanical  appearance 
of  this  disputed  signature  which  even  a  most  liberal  consideration  can- 
not disregard. — Matter  of  Burtis,  43  Miscellaneous  Reports,  (N.  Y.) 
(1904)  (See  Fig.  109). 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        121 

In  tremor  of  illiteracy  the  changes  in  direction  are  not 
apt  to  be  as  numerous  as  in  tremor  of  age  or  of  weak- 
ness, and  in  such  writing  omissions  of  parts  of  letters 
or  strokes  are  not  common,  but,  on  the  contrary,  the 
writing  may  be  clumsily  overwritten,  to  make  it  con- 
form to  standard  forms.  Illiterate  tremor  is  character- 
ized by  a  general  irregularity  that  is  due  to  hesitation 
because  of  uncertainty  as  to  the  form  and  to  muscular 
clumsiness  resulting  from  unfamiliarity  with  the  whole 
writing  process. 

Illiterate  writing,  even  on  ruled  paper,  frequently 
shows  a  pronounced  irregularity  in  alignment,  some  of 
it  being  above  the  line  and  some  through  the  line,  or  the 
words  may  each  go  up  from  the  line  so  that  the  end  of 
each  word  is  higher  than  the  beginning,  this  character- 
istic being  due  to  the  fact  that  the  arm  is  held  so  that 
the  center  of  motion  is  so  far  to  the  right  that  as  the 
hand  moves  along  it  is  inevitably  raised  above  the  general 
line  of  writing.  On  unruled  paper  this  position  natural- 
ly has  a  tendency  to  make  the  writing  go  up-hill  across 
the  whole  sheet  or  page. 

Disconnections  or  pen-lifts  between  letters  in  words 
may  be  due  to  lack  of  movement  control.  With  those 
who  write  clumsily  or  with  difficulty  the  pen  is  raised 
frequently  to  get  a  new  adjustment  and  make  a  fresh 
start,  and  words  may  be  broken  after  almost  any  letter, 
depending  somewhat  upon  where  it  is  in  the  word.  With 
most  writers,  however,  disconnections  are  more  closely 
related  to  design  of  letters  than  with  movement,  and 
the  habits  controlling  this  characteristic  were  acquired 
when  writing  was  first  learned. 

Many  are  taught  when  learning  to  write  to  take  up 


122 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


the  pen  before  the  letters  a,  c,  d,  g,  q  and  t,  and  the 
design  of  certain  styles  of  these  small  letters  requires 
that  the  pen  be  raised.  Similarities  in  these  particulars 
would  not  therefore  be  very  significant  as  showing 
identity  of  two  writings,  except  in  combination  with 
other  characteristics,  but  pronounced  dissimilarities  in 
these  characteristics  would  be  strong  evidence  of  a  lack 
of  identity. 

Many  peculiar  distinctively  individual  habits  are  de- 
veloped in  this  matter  of  raising  the  pen  before  certain 


FIG.  60 — Illustration  of  divergent  pen-lift  habits,  showing  eight  pen-lifts 
in  first  word  and  none  in  last. 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        123 

strokes  or  following  certain  letters,  and  this  character- 
istic should  receive  careful  attention  in  examining  a 
handwriting.  It  is  one  of  those  inconspicuous  and  un- 
conscious habits  that  are  usually  entirely  disregarded  in 
a  simulated  writing^  and  its  careful  consideration  is  of 
special  importance  in  examining  anonymous  letters  or 
documents  of  any  kind  which  contain  a  considerable 
quantity  of  writing.  This  matter  of  joinings  and  pen 
lifts  is  a  subject  requiring  special  attention  in  examining 
writings  that  may  have  been  written  by  writers  that 
originally  learned  different  systems  of  writing.  Forged 
writing  often  shows  too  many  pen  lifts  (Fig.  59) . 

Alignment  in  writing  as  in  printing  is  the  relation  of 
the  several  characters  of  a  word,  or  signature  or  line  of 
writing,  to  an  actual  or  imaginary  base  line.  Differ- 
ences and  deviations  in  alignment  conditions  are  due 
mainly  to  differences  in  movement,  in  position  and  in 
design  of  letters.  In  many  writings  alignment  is  a  char- 
acteristic of  much  significance  and  shows  many  uncon- 
scious, individual  habits,  and  should  always  be  consid- 
ered in  examining  a  writing. 

Those  who  write  with  the  elbow  as  the  center  of  lateral 
motion  and  hold  the  arm  at  right  angles  to  the  line  of 
writing  often  write  words  almost  perfectly  aligned  and 
straight  across  the  page  even  on  wide  unruled  paper. 
Those  who  write  with  the  wrist  as  the  center  of  motion 
may  write  lines  of  writing  made  up  of  short  arcs  of  a 
circle,  representing  the  reach  of  the  hand  with  the  wrist 
at  rest  when  moved  around  to  the  right  as  far  as  the 
hand  will  reach.  The  most  uneven  alignment  is  pro- 
duced when  the  arm  is  too  far  around  to  the  right  or 
the  paper  too  far  to  the  left  so  that  lateral  motions  of 


124  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

the  hand  to  the  right  extend  above  the  base  line  of  the 
writing.  Writing  produced  with  freedom  in  this  posi- 
tion will  show  very  uneven  alignment. 

Deviation  from  alignment  in  individual  letters  is  often 
the  result  of  defective  or  distorted  designs  of  letters  and 
like  many  other  individual  peculiarities  was  acquired 
when  writing  was  first  learned,  or  such  a  deviation  may 
be  a  gradual  and  unconscious  evolution  from  an  original 
form.  Some  writers  will  habitually  make  certain  letters 
too  high  and  others  too  low,  and  many  extraordinary 
peculiarities  will  be  found  in  connection  with  this  char- 
acteristic. There  are  writers  who  will  always  make  the 
sharp  intermediate  angles  of  h,  k,  m,  n  and  the  German 
t  too  long  so  that  they  extend  below  the  line  of  the  other 
letters,  while  others  make  them  too  short. 

Other  writers  will  invariably  make  the  small  s  too  low 
while  others  again  always  make  it  too  high.  In  some 
writing  the  alignment  of  certain  letters  is  always  affected 
when  they  precede  or  follow  certain  other  letters,  making 
a  combined  characteristic  that  may  have  much  force  as 
showing  a  particular  writer,  since  this  is  a  peculiarity  in 
general  writing  that  might  not  be  shown  in  the  model 
writing  imitated  by  the  forger  even  though  the  model 
contained  all  the  letters  imitated  but  in  a  different  order. 
The  alignment  of  capital  letters  with  many  writers  is 
abnormal  and,  especially  in  anonymous  letter  investiga- 
tions, should  be  carefully  observed. 

Some  of  these  peculiarities  are  not  conspicuous,  and 
for  that  reason  are  the  more  significant  as  individualities, 
and  they  may  be  overlooked  if  writing  is  not  enlarged 
somewhat  for  the  purpose  of  examination.  Fine  lines 
should  be  drawn  at  the  bottom  and  top  of  the  minimum 


MOVEMENTS,  LINE  QUALITY  AND  ALIGNMENT        125 


letters  as  they  appear 
on  an  enlarged  photo- 
graph; in  this  way  per- 
sistent peculiarities 
may  be  discovered  and 
shown  that  otherwise 
will  not  be  properly 
interpreted. 

In  any  examination 
it  is  well  to  make  a 
definite  list  of  all  the 
things  to  consider  and 
take  them  up  in  order 
and  then  nothing  will 
be  omitted.  One  who 
attempts  to  see  all 
things  at  once  will  not 
see  some  things  clearly 

and  may  omit   entirely   some   important   part   of  the 
process. 

It  is  also  well  always  to  avoid  hasty  judgment  even 
on  what  at  first  may  seem  to  be  a  comparatively  unim- 
portant inquiry.  It  is  better  to  have  a  reputation  for 
accuracy  than  for  celerity. 


FIG.  60-a.     Six  examples  of  alignment, 

1  Uniform,  2  Irregular,  3  Curved, 

4  Upward,  5  Downward, 

6  Freakish. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING 

The  manner  of  holding  the  pen  is  one  of  the  most  fixed 
of  writing  habits,  but  varies  greatly  with  different 
writers,  so  that  it  becomes  necessary  to  consider  the  ques- 
tion in  every  writing  investigation.  The  form  of  a  writ- 
ing is  often  very  well  simulated,  yet  this  may  be  done 
with  a  pen  position  and  a  manner  of  writing  utterly  in- 
consistent with  the  habits  shown  in  the  writing  imitated. 

Pen  positions  differ  widely  and  are  of  great  variety, 
but  vary  in  three  principal  ways;  first,  in  the  angle  of 
the  pen  to  the  surface  of  the  paper,  second,  in  the  angle 
of  the  pen  to  the  line  or  direction  of  the  writing,  and, 
third,  in  the  uniformity  of  pressure  of  the  two  nibs 
of  the  pen. 

The  pen  is  held  by  different  writers  at  an  angle  with 
the  surface  of  the  paper  varying  all  the  way  from  al- 
most vertical  down  to  only  fifteen  to  twenty  degrees 
from  the  horizontal.  The  position  of  the  pen  in  relation 
to  the  line  of  writing  varies  as  much  as  ninety  degrees, 
ranging  from  a  position  in  which  the  penholder  points 
directly  toward  the  writer  and  parallel  with  the  down- 
ward strokes  of  slanted  writing,  to  a  position  with  the 
pen  swung  round  to  the  right  nearly  parallel  with  the 
line  of  writing.  The  relation  of  the  nibs  of  the  pen  to 
the  paper,  or  the  third  point  already  mentioned,  varies 
all  the  way  from  almost  exclusive  pressure  on  the  left 
nib  to  similar  pressure  on  the  right.  All  these  divergent 

[126] 


PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING        127 


conditions  must  necessarily  affect  the  writing  in  dis- 
tinctive ways  entirely  aside  from  that  of  general  form 
or  outline  of  letters. 

A  pen  held  in  nearly  a  vertical  position  will  make  a 
fine  line  of  about  the  same  width  throughout  without 
pronounced  shading  and  often  with  a  tendency  to  a 
broken  or  a  scratchy  effect.  Such  writing,  as  a  rule,  is 
produced  almost  en- 
tirely with  the  finger 
movement.  With  a 
pen  held  in  the  op- 
posite position,  or 
down  nearly  hori- 
zontal to  the  paper, 
a  broader  stroke  with 
a  similar  pen  will  be 
made;  the  ink  will 
follow  the  pen  back 
at  the  angles  or  nar- 
row turns  and  tend 
to  fill  up  such  parts; 
loops  will  often  be 
filled  in  at  the  top 
where  the  strokes  go 
to  the  left,  and  the 
lower  edges  of  such 
strokes,  as  shown  by 
the  microscope,  will 
be  very  rough.  With 
the  pen  held  very 
low  frequent  shad- 
ing is  very  common 


FIG.  61 — Pen  Position  in  relation  to  surface 
of  paper. 


128 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


and  this  position 
is  often  that  as- 
sumed by  one 
using  the  free 
arm  movement. 
This  position  of 
the  pen  is  in- 
consistent with 
finger  move- 
ment writing. 

As  is  well 
understood, 
what  is  spoken 
of  as  the  point 
of  an  ordinary 
pen  is  really  two 
points  fornied 
by  two  pieces  of  metal  called  nibs  lying  close  together 
and  making  one  mark  when  a  stroke  is  made  without 
pressure.  Pressure  separates  the  nibs  producing  shad- 
ing and  the  pressure  necessary  to  separate  the  two  nibs 
has  a  tendency  to  indent,  or  disturb  the  fiber  of  the  paper 
more  or  less,  making  the  ink  line  heavier  in  their  direct 
track  at  the  edges  of  the  stroke.  It  is  impossible  to 
hold  the  pen  in  any  one  position  so  that  strokes  at  right 
angles  to  each  other  can  be  smoothly  shaded  and  both 
show  the  distinct  and  equal  track  of  both  pen  nibs ;  from 
this  fact  the  pen  position  of  a  writing  can  be  determined 
by  the  location  of  the  emphasis  or  shading. 

If  the  pen  is  held  parallel  with  the  downward  strokes 
and  pointing  toward  the  writer,  such  strokes  under  pres- 
sure will  show  shading  and  the  nibs  of  the  pen  will  sep- 


FIG.  62 — Location  of  shading  showing  pen  position. 


PEX  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING        129 


arate  and  leave  parallel 
tracks  on  strokes  made  in 
line  with  the  pen  (Fig.  62), 
but  will  gradually  approach 
each  other  as  the  stroke 
swings  around  to  the  right 
until  the  two  nibs  follow 
each  other  in  making  the 
single  line.  Thus  lateral 
strokes  with  the  pen  in  this 
position  are  made  across  the 
nibs  and  would  not  show 
separate  and  parallel  tracks 
even  if  pressure  is  made  at 
such  point. 

With  a  pen  inclined 
around  to  the  right,  towards 
a  position  parallel  with  the 
written  line,  it  will  be  seen 
that  lateral  strokes  made 
from  left  to  right  will  under 
pressure  show  shading  and 
the  parallel  nib  marks  of 
the  pen,  and  on  downward 
strokes  with  the  pen  in  this 
position  one  nib  will  nearly 
if  not  quite  follow  in  the 
track  of  the  other.  This 
fact  is  well  illustrated  by 

making    shaded    Circles    with     FlG-  63— Pen  position  in  relation  to 

the  line  of  writing. 

a  pen;  it  will  be  seen  that 

in  such  forms  the  location  of  the  shading  and  the  parallel 


130  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

nib  marks  will  be  governed  entirely  by  the  pen  position. 

With  a  stub  pen  held  in  the  usual  position  in  which 
such  pens  are  held,  inclined  somewhat  around  to  the 
right,  the  writing  strokes  will  show  the  full  width  of  the 
pen  point  not  only  on  the  lateral  strokes  from  left  to 
right  but  also  on  those  from  right  to  left  or  at  the  tops 
or  bottoms  of  letters  (see  Ex.  h,  Fig.  65),  because  at 
these  points  the  width  of  the  pen  point  is  brought  to  a 
position  at  right  angles  to  the  strokes  and  makes  a  mark 
the  full  width  of  the  point.  This  increasing  width  of 
strokes  made  from  the  right  back  to  the  left  at  the  tops 
of  letters  is  the  typical  mark  of  stub  pen  writing.  This 
is  not  really  shading  in  the  ordinary  sense  because  it  is 
produced  without  any  increase  of  pressure  whatever 
and  may  not  show  any  nib  marks.  Most  stub  pen  writers 
hold  the  pen  well  around  to  the  right  and  many  such 
pens  have  a  point  cut  not  straight  across  but  diagonally, 
requiring  this  position  as  described  in  order  to  write 
smoothly. 

Pen  pressure  on  the  nibs  of  the  pen  is  varied  in  three 
principal  ways.  Some  writers  put  greater  pressure  on 
the  right  nib,  others  on  the  left,  while  others  write  with 
uniform  pressure  on  both  nibs.  These  three  habits  are 
shown  by  the  general  quality  of  the  stroke  and  particu- 
larly by  the  comparative  smoothness  or  roughness  of 
the  right  and  left  margins. 

With  the  pen  otherwise  in  normal  position  and  pres- 
sure on  the  left  nib,  up  strokes  may  be  slightly  heavier 
than  unshaded  down  strokes  and  the  right  side  of  the 
line  will  be  rougher  and  more  indented  and  ragged  as 
seen  under  magnification,  and  the  left  nib  track  on 
shaded  strokes  will  be  more  pronounced  and  deeper  as 
viewed  by  the  microscope. 


PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING         131 

With  pressure  on  the  right  nib  these  results  are  partly 
reversed  with  no  increase  in  width  on  up  strokes.  With 
equal  pressure  on  both  nibs  the  line  margins  are  uniform 
with  each  other  and  the  line  or  stroke  on  smooth  paper 
appears  clear-cut  and  smooth  if  written  with  a  free 
movement.  A  divergent  habit  of  pen  holding  as  shown 
in  a  disputed  writing  is  often  very  strong  evidence  point- 
ing to  a  different  writer,  and,  like  movement  or  manner 
of  writing,  may  be  much  more  significant  than  certain 
minor  changes  in  form  characteristics. 

When  viewed  by  the  microscope  under  even  low  mag- 
nification, the  edges  of  an  ink  line  appear  indented  and 
rough.  This  roughness  is  accentuated  by  certain  pen 
positions  which  bring  the  writing  instrument  in  such 
relation  to  the  uneven  surface  of  writing  paper  that  one 
side  of  the  line  is  made  more  uneven  than  the  other  even 
when  the  line  is  made  with  no  tremor  whatever.  The 
character  of  the  microscopic  edges  of  the  lines  in  a 
general  way  puts  all  writers  into  one  of  three  classes, 
those  who  make  the  majority  of  pen  strokes  rougher 
on  the  left,  on  the  right,  or  those  whose  strokes  show 
uniformity. 

On  account  of  the  position  of  the  pen  in  relation  to  a 
majority  of  the  strokes,  right  slant  writing  more  fre- 
quently shows  an  excess  of  roughness  on  the  right  and 
lower  side  of  pen  strokes,  making  this  class  of  writers 
much  larger  than  either  of  the  other  two.  This  line  edge 
characteristic  may  be  very  significant  as  showing  diverg- 
ence in  two  writings,  but  shows  identity  of  two  writings 
only  so  far  as  it  puts  them  both  into  what  must  neces- 
sarily be  a  very  large  class.  The  character  and  extent 
of  the  roughness  of  the  line  edges  are  greatly  changed 


132  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

by  changes  in  the  character  of  the  surface  of  the  paper, 
in  its  sizing,  and  in  the  materials  of  which  it  is  made. 
The  result  is  also  affected  by  the  character  and  condi- 
tion of  the  ink  used  and  by  the  rapidity,  direction  and 
weight  of  the  stroke. 

One  of  the  most  personal  but  somewhat  hidden  char- 
acteristics of  writing  is  that  which  for  want  of  a  better 
term  is  described  as  pen  pressure.  The  weight  of  hand, 
gradation  of  pressure,  and  placing  of  emphasis  radical- 
ly change  the  appearance  of  a  writing  as  a  whole  with- 
out changing  the  form  in  any  way.  These  are  the  deli- 
cate characteristics  that  almost  baffle  simulation  and 
when  properly  exemplified  are  always  among  the  strong- 
est evidences  of  genuineness. 

The  pen  of  certain  writers  ( 1 )  dances  over  the  paper 
with  a  springy,  rhythmic  motion  that  leaves  a  charac- 
teristic record;  in  other  hands  (2)  the  writing  instru- 
ment moves  in  a  stately  way  that  suggests  strength  but 
not  speed,  while  as  guided  by  other  writers  a  pen  (3) 
leaves  an  irregular,  broken  line  that  is  the  record  of  a 


FIG.  64 — Four  divergent  examples  of  pen  pressure. 


PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING        133 

rapid,  nervous  movement.  The  record  of  the  pen  of 
still  another  class  of  writers  (4)  leaves  a  heavy,  uneven, 
ragged  line  due  to  lack  of  skill  and  constant  variation 
in  pen  pressure  ( Fig.  64 ).  It  is  easy  to  understand  how 
difficult  it  would  be  for  a  writer  of  the  fourth  class, 
specified  above,  to  imitate  successfully  the  writing  of 
the  first  or  second  class. 

Pen  pressure,  perhaps,  more  than  anything  else  in 
certain  writing  shows  that  freedom  and  unconsciousness 
of  the  writing  process  that  points  to  genuineness ;  or  on 
the  contrary  shows  that  halting,  studied,  hesitating 
stroke  that  is  characteristic  of  forgery.  A  genuine  writ- 
ing does  not  often  suggest  that  the  writer  is  thinking  of 
what  he  is  doing  with  his  pen,  while  a  dishonest  writing 
when  examined  with  care  often  shows  quite  conclusively 
that  the  writer  was  thinking  of  nothing  else.  The  main 
features  of  this  pen  pressure  characteristic  are  not  con- 
sciously acquired  and  not  intentionally  put  into  a  writ- 
ing and  therefore  are  all  the  more  significant  and  per- 
sonal and  should  always  be  most  carefully  considered 
in  examining  a  questioned  writing. 

Lack  of  muscular  skill  with  the  pen,  or  what  is  usually 
described  as  tremor,  is  shown  by  lack  of  uniformity  of 
speed  in  the  making  of  pen  strokes  and  by  involuntary 
horizontal  and  vertical  movements.  Such  uncontrolled 
horizontal  movements  produce  a  line  with  abrupt 
changes  of  direction,  of  a  more  or  less  zigzag  character, 
and  the  involuntary  vertical  movements  produce  -a  line 
of  varying  width  or  intensity  (Fig.  53)  as  the  pressure 
is  suddenly  increased  or  diminished.  This  latter  char- 
acteristic, which  may  not  always  be  recognized  as  tremor, 
is  in  fact  involuntary  pen  pressure  or  vertical  tremor. 


134  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

and  may  be  of  great  significance  in  identifying  a  hand- 
writing. This  varying  pressure  on  light  strokes  is  often 
the  result  of  the  slow  drawing  movement  required  to 
produce  a  traced  forgery. 

No  very  definite  distinction  can  be  drawn  between 
pen  pressure  and  shading  in  writing.  The  distinc- 
tion made  in  the  present  discussion  is  that  pen  pres- 
sure refers  more  especially  to  the  involuntary  plac- 
ing of  emphasis,  smoothness  of  stroke  and  quality 
of  line  in  writing,  as  distinguished  from  that  delib- 
erate and  voluntary  emphasis  that  is  ordinarily  de- 
scribed as  shading.  This  last  named  important  qual- 
ity or  feature  of  writing,  acquired  at  first  by  study 
and  careful  imitation,  also  becomes  an  unconscious, 
involuntary  habit  and  is  a  characteristic  that  should 
^  always  be  most  carefully  considered.  The  shading 
impulse  with  some  writers  is  a  habit  more  fixed 
than  that  of  form,  and  even  when  writing  with  a  pen  so 
stiff  that  the  nibs  will  not  spread  the  increased  pressure 
on  the  strokes  ordinarily  shaded  is  perfectly  apparent  by 
the  intensified  line  that  may  be  but  little  if  any  broader 
than  the  other  strokes. 

Shading  should  be  studied  with  especial  attention  to 
its  (1)  form,  (2)  its  intensity,  (3)  its  frequency,  and 
(4)  its  exact  location.  In  many  instances  faulty  shad- 
ing is  one  of  the  first  and  strongest  evidences  of  fraudu- 
lent handwriting. 

Shading  habits  in  writing  can  be  classified  in  a  general 
way  as  follows : 

(a)  Persistent  or  continuous  as  on  nearly  every  down- 
ward stroke;  (b)  rare,  unintentional  or  accidental;  (c) 
graduated,  controlled,  smooth  and  artistic,  as  shown  by 


PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING         135 


gradual  increase  and  decrease  of  pressure;  (d)  impul- 
sive, nervous,  bunchy  or  the  result  of  sudden  and  violent 
pressure;  (e)  freakish  or  peculiar,  as  only  on  certain 
parts  of  words  or  occa- 
sional letters;  (f)  rough 
or  scratchy  as  across  pen 
points;  (g)  lateral  or 
mainly  on  strokes  from 
left  to  right;  (h)  stub 
pen  shading  or  on  strokes 
made  back  to  left,  particu- 
larly at  tops  of  letters 
(Fig.  65) .  Some  of  these 
habits  are  closely  related 
to  pen  position  and  must 
be  studied  in  connection 
with  that  subject. 

Because  of  exclusive 
attention  to  form,  a 
forged  imitation  of  a 
shaded  signature  often 
is  first  written  without 
proper  shading  and  the 
lines  are  afterwards 
strengthened  by  a  careful 
retouching.  This  evidence 
of  patching  and  fixing  is 
usually  unmistakable 
under  the  microscope  or 
in  a  properly  made  en- 
larged photograph,  and 

r>,  .  .       .  FIG.    65 — Eight   examples   of    shading 

Often    IS    Very    Convincing  from  business  envelopes. 


136  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

\  evidence  of  fraud.  A  careless  and  perfectly  evident 
patching  of  a  broken  line,  due  to  a  defective  pen  or 
where  the  ink  failed,  is  readily  distinguished  from  deli- 
cate changes  in  a  signature  not  necessary  to  its  comple- 
tion or  legibility. 

Defects  of  the  character  just  described  are  most  like- 
ly to  appear  in  forgeries  made  to  imitate  the  writing  of 
old  people  who  write  the  old  round-hand.  With  many 
writers  one  of  the  fixed  characteristics  of  this  old  writ- 
ing, originally  written  with  quill  pens,  is  the  shading  of 
every  downward  stroke,  a  habit  which  with  a  mature 
writer  is  almost  uncontrollable  and  is  usually  apparent 
in  every  letter.  Simulation  of  this  writing  by  one  who 
habitually  writes  an  unshaded  system  often  omits  or  dis- 
torts this  important  feature  in  whole  or  in  part. 

The  attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  explain  lack  of 
-  proper  shading  by  the  supposition  that  a  stiff  pen  was 
used  when  even  the  disputed  writing  itself  actually  con- 
tains some  shaded  parts  which,  however,  are  in  the  wrong 
places,  thus  showing  the  fraudulent  character  of  the 
writing  because  the  shading  is  omitted  where  it  should 
appear  and  is  placed  where  it  does  not  belong.  A  shaded 
line  may  be  only  slightly  heavier  than  a  normal  or  un- 
shaded line,  or  may,  with  a  flexible  pen,  be  from  four  to 
ten  times  as  wide.  In  a  careful  study  and  analysis  of 
this  question  it  is  important  that  actual  measurements 
of  strokes  be  made. 

A  traced  forgery  is  an  attempt  to  reproduce  the  exact 
lines  of  a  model,  while  a  simulated  or  copied  forgery  is 
a  copy  or  imitation  of  the  general  form  of  the  original. 
The  method  required  in  either  case  is  almost  certain  to 
lead  to  divergences  in  pen  position,  pen  pressure  and 


PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING        137 

shading.  Both  of  these  classes  of  forgery  are  almost  in- 
variably slowly  and  carefully  made  with  but  little  if  any 
attention  to  anything  but  the  form.  As  ordinarily  pro- 
duced, they  also  both  require  frequent  stops  to  look  at 
the  copy  or  inspect  the  result,  or  to  change  the  position 
of  the  hand,  and  as  a  rule  show  a  line  with  an  unequal 
distribution  of  ink,  frequent  breaks  and  interruptions 
and  distinct  variations  in  pressure,  all  tending  to  pro- 
duce a  total  result  differing  radically  from  a  genuine 
writing  in  line  quality,  pen  pressure,  and  shading. 

These  tracing  and  simulating  processes  require  a  firm 
position  of  the  hand  in  order  to  draw  with  even  approxi- 
mate accuracy  the  lines  of  the  model,  and  this  firmness  of 
position  is  most  readily  secured  by  holding  the  hand 
down  on  the  side,  which  necessarily  inclines  the  pen  some- 
what over  to  the  right.  This  position  naturally  tends 
to  make  of  maximum  width  those  portions  of  the  strokes 
which  are  at  the  bottom  of  the  letters  or  on  the  strokes 
made  from  left  to  right.  This  characteristic  shading  is 
very  often  found  in  fraudulent  writing. 

In  producing  a  tracing  or  simulation  of  a  writing  the 
pen  may  be  held  over  to  the  right  for  the  further  reason 
that  the  track  of  the  pen  as  the  stroke  is  made  can  thus 
be  more  readily  seen  by  the  writer.  This  is  especially 
apt  to  be  true  in  case  the  forgery  is  traced  over  a  faint 
image  as  seen  through  the  paper  or  over  a  very  light 
line  first  drawn.  The  location  of  the  shading  or  maxi- 
mum pressure  thus  becomes  of  vital  importance  for  two 
reasons;  the  position  of  the  shading  may  show  that  the 
pen  must  have  been  held  far  over  to  the  right,  and,  if 
the  locations  of  the  shaded  places  differ  from  the  model 
or  genuine  writing,  it  is  doubly  significant,  as  it  not  only 


138  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

shows  a  difference  in  the  writing  itself,  but  suggests  the 
possible  method  by  which  the  forgery  was  produced. 
Such  a  divergence  from  the  genuine  writing  is  particu- 
larly strong  evidence  of  forgery  if  the  writing  imitated 
is  by  one  whose  fixed  habit  it  is  to  hold  the  pen  inclined 
somewhat  to  the  left  or  nearly  parallel  with  the  down- 
ward strokes  as  is  the  case  with  those  who  shade  all 
downward  strokes. 

As  we  have  already  seen,  shading  itself  is  varied  in 
many  significant  ways  and  shows  numerous  peculiar  and 
unaccountable  peculiarities  that  may  be  properly  classed 
as  the  curiosities  or  idiosyncrasies  of  writing.  A 
thorough  examination  of  a  writing  in  dispute  should, 
as  stated,  give  the  most  careful  attention  to  this  matter 
of  location,  character,  and  frequency  of  shading  and  it- 
is  sometimes  helpful  if  the  results  of  the  examination 
are  systematically  tabulated.  It  will  be  found  that  some 
writers  shade  slightly  the  beginning  of  every  word  or 
letter,  and  others,  without  any  reason,  will  shade  only 
the  concluding  stroke  at  the  very  tip.  Some  writers 
will  shade  a  few  letters  every  time  they  occur  but  no 
others  whatever,  while  other  writers  shade  only  certain 
parts  of  words  whatever  the  letters  may  be.  There  are 
those  who  persistently  try  to  shade  lateral  strokes  with 
the  pen  in  such  position  that  such  a  stroke  is  across  the 
point,  the  result  being  a  ragged,  heavy  line  in  which  the 
pen  nibs  nearly  follow  each  other  and  scratch  the  paper, 
the  result  necessarily  being  an  uneven,  rough  line 
(Fig.  66). 

Some  writers  cross  the  "t"  with  a  stroke  beginning 
with  pressure  and  ending  with  a  light  line,  while  others 
begin  with  a  light  line  but  end  with  a  heavy  shading 


PEN  POSITION,  PEN  PRESSURE,  AND  SHADING        139 


showing  exactly  the  op- 
posite characteristic. 
Other  writers  will  shade 
the  middle  of  the  stroke 
and  some  may  make  the 
stroke  a  very  light  line 
throughout  its  whole 
length,  and  others 
shade  it  heavily  from 
end  to  end.  A  wonder- 
ful variety  of  shadings 
is  shown  in  the  illustra- 
tions in  the  chapter 
treating  of  variety  of 
form.  Attention  is  par- 
ticularly directed  to 
the  illustration  of  "t" 
crossings.  A  high  de- 
gree of  skill  is  required 
to  make  and  place  ac- 
curately the  many  vari- 
ations of  shaded  strokes 
shown  on  all  the  capital 
and  small  letters,  and 
they  are  not  likely  to 
be  successfully  imitated 
except  by  an  adept; 
and  fortunately  the 
forger  is  not  usually 
one  who  possesses  extraordinary  skill. 

There  is  a  close  relation  between  shading  and  move- 
ment because  shading  necessarily  interferes  somewhat 


FIG.  66 — Examples  of  shading:   1,  light 

line;  2,  every  down  stroke;  3,  stub 

pen ;  4,  bunchy ;  5,  final  stroke ; 

6,  lateral  strokes. 


140  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

with  speed,  although  not  with  continuity  and  smooth- 
ness. Clear-cut  smooth  shades,  especially  on  curves, 
show  a  free  and  well  controlled  movement  and  simulated 
or  traced  writing  is  nearly  always  defective  in  this  par- 
ticular feature.  Being  self-conscious  and  hesitating  it 
usually  lacks  the  smoothness  and  directness  that  are 
characteristic  of  genuineness. 

On  account  of  the  necessity  of  seeing  clearly  what 
he  is  doing  the  forger  may  put  the  paper  on  which  the 
writing  is  being  done  directly  in  front  of  him  as  a  book 
is  held  in  reading,  and  not  slightly  around  to  the  right 
as  is  the  usual  position  in  writing.  This  front  position 
of  the  paper,  with  the  arm  around  to  the  right  approach- 
ing a  position  parallel  with  the  line  of  writing,  often 
produces  the  result  of  writing  slightly  up-hill,  as  de- 
'scribed  in  the  chapter  on  movements,  especially  if  effort 
is  being  made  to  reproduce  a  copy  whose  forms  and  pro- 
portions are  somewhat  unfamiliar.  Thus  it  is  often 
found  that  a  forgery  of  this  class  inclines  upward  and 
may  thus  differ  in  another  particular  from  the  genuine 
writing  imitated. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

ARRANGEMENT,    SIZE,    PROPORTIONS,   SPACING   AND   SLANT 

OF  WRITING 

Writing  habits  are  the  result  of  many  and  varied 
causes;  some  are  the  direct  outgrowth  of  definite  teach- 
ing, many  are  the  result  of  unconscious  imitation,  while 
others  are  due  to  some  accidental  condition  or  circum- 
stance, and  all  are  in  some  degree  the  expression  of 
certain  mental  and  physical  traits  of  the  writer  as  af- 
fected by  environment  and  occupation.  Habits  of  ar- 
rangement of  the  various  parts  of  a  writing  are  especial- 
ly of  this  complex  character,  and  a  study  of  such  habits 
is  particularly  necessary  and  important  in  the  examina- 
tion of  disputed  letters  or  of  any  document  containing 
considerable  matter. 

The  habits  of  arrangement  of  the  parts  of  a  writing 
are  undoubtedly  largely  governed  by  the  artistic  ability 
or  sense  of  proportion  of  the  writer,  and,  like  all  signifi- 
cant writing  habits,  are,  for  the  most  part,  developed 
and  grown  into  rather  than  consciously  acquired.  With- 
out actual  examination  but  very  few  writers  can  specify 
even  the  most  conspicuous  of  their  own  habits  in  this 
matter  of  arrangement,  any  more  than  they  can  tell  how 
they  carry  their  hands  as  they  walk  or  what  gestures 
they  make  during  conversation,  or  do  the  thousand  and 
one  other  things  which  make  up  individuality.  It  is 
inevitable  that  in  producing  simulated  or  fraudulent 
writing  these  unconscious  characteristics  of  the  writer 

[141] 


142  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

himself  are  given  no  consideration,  and  similar  char- 
acteristics in  the  writing  imitated  are  misunderstood  and 
misinterpreted. 

The  main  features  for  consideration  under  the  general 
head  of  arrangement  are:  (1)  the  general  placing  of 
writing  on  a  sheet  or  page  and  its  artistic  and  balanced 
arrangement  of  parts  or  its  unbalanced  and  inartistic 
appearance;  (2)  the  wide,  narrow,  mixed  or  uniform 
spacing  between  lines,  between  words,  between  separate 
capitals,  between  capitals  and  small  letters  in  the  same 
words;  (3)  placing  or  locating  of  words  with  reference 
to  an  imaginary  or  actual  base  line,  i.  e.,  on  the  line, 
above  the  line,  below  the  line,  or  partly  above  and  partly 
below;  (4)  presence  or  absence,  character  and  uni- 
formity of  margins  at  left,  at  right,  at  top  and  bottom 
of  sheet ;  ( 5 )  position  of  signature  in  relation  to  writing 
it  follows;  (6)  horizontal,  uphill,  downhill,  curved  or 
mixed  direction  of  signature  on  line  of  writing;  (7) 
parallelism  and  width  of  space  between  lines  of  writing 
on  envelope  addresses  or  unruled  paper;  (8)  arrange- 
ment of  headings1,  introductions  and  conclusions  of  let- 
ters and  their  relation  to  each  other  and  to  body  of  writ- 
ing; (9)  paragraphing  and  its  frequency  or  omission 
and  average  depth  of  indentation  at  beginning  of  para- 
graphs; (10)  arrangement  of  figures  and  abbreviations, 
dollar  and  cents  signs,  etc.,  to  line  of  writing  and  to 
preceding  or  following  writing;  (11)  interlineations 

aln  every  letter  which  we  have  seen  from  the  pen  of  Mrs.  Gaines 
the  date  thereof  and  the  name  of  the  place  whence  written  are  placed 
on  the  extreme  right  edge  of  the  paper,  so  close  thereto,  as  to  leave 
barely  enough  space  to  write  the  necessary  words.  In  the  confidential 
letter,  the  words  "Washington,  D.  C"  are  placed  near  the  middle  of 
the  line,  more  to  the  left  of  the  paper;  and  in  the  spurious  will  the 
words  "New  Orleans"  are  located  on  the  extreme  left  edge  of  the  paper. 
— Succession  of  Gaines,  38  La.  135  (1886). 


WRITING  HABITS  143 

and  their  character,  position  and  frequency;  (12)  en- 
velope addresses  and  their  style,  position  and  arrange- 
ment; (13)  connections  or  unbroken  pen  strokes  be- 
tween words;  (14)  number  of  words  to  a  line  as  in 
telegraphers'  writing;  (15)  location  of  punctuation 
marks  with  relation  to  base  line  and  to  the  words  which 
they  follow;  (16)  underscoring  and  its  location. 

Investigation  shows  that  every  writer  has  habits  in 
these  directions  most  of  which  are  entirely  unconscious 
and  all  of  which  are  repeated  with  remarkable  regularity. 
All  frequent  acts  tend  to  become  automatic,  habit  sup- 
planting mental  direction,  and  this  is  a  conspicuous  fact 
in  all  phases  of  the  writing  process.  The  writing  act  as 
normally  performed  follows  the  smooth  grooves  of  habit 
until  most  writing  is  actually  performed  without  even 
the  assistance  of  the  sense  of  sight  except  as  directed  to 
the  process  in  general1.  The  majority  of  the  numerous 
arrangement  habits  named  above  with  many  writers  have 
never  received  conscious  attention  at  any  time,  and  the 
results  have  been  developed  by  the  requirements  and 
external  conditions  surrounding  the  individual.  It  is 
well  known  that  the  condensed  style  of  ancient  writings 


Developed  writing  movements  depend,  then,  on  the  existence  of  a 
group  of  brain-cells  which  are  interconnected  and  interrelated  in  a 
most  complex  way.  The  growth  of  this  series  of  interconnections  be- 
tween the  cells  was  a  process  that  required  time  and  practice.  At  the 
beginning  of  this  practice  each  cell  acted  in  a  large  measure  apart 
from  its  fellows,  and  there  was  no  well-organized  co-operation,  or 
muscular  co-ordination  as  we  have  learned  to  call  it. — Charles  Hub- 
bard  Judd,  Ph.  D.,  Genetic  Psychology,  Chapter  VI.,  p.  166. 

The  laws  of  motor  habit  in  the  lower  centres  of  the  nervous  system 
are  disputed  by  no  one.  A  series  of  movements  repeated  in  a  certain 
order  tend  to  unroll  themselves  with  peculiar  ease  in  that  order  for- 
ever afterward.  Number  one  awakens  number  two,  and  that  awakens 
number  three,  and  so  on  till  the  last  is  produced.  A  habit  of  this  kind 
once  become  inveterate  may  go  on  automatically. — William  James, 
Principles  of  Psychology,  Vol.  I.,  p.  554. 


144  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

was  due  in  part  to  the  cost  and  scarcity  of  the  materials 
upon  which  writing  was  placed,  and  certain  habits  of 
many  writers  are  due  in  a  measure  to  accidental  external 
conditions  which  surrounded  them  at  some  time. 

Bookkeepers  and  others  who  write  much  with  fine 


FIG.  67 — Telegrapher's  writing  from  letter.     Five  words  to  line,  typical  word  connec- 
tions and  circle  small  "o's." 

pens  on  narrow  ruled  books  acquire  a  concise  and  definite 
style  that  is  of  a  distinct  but  somewhat  effeminate  char- 
acter, while  in  contrast  with  this  the  railroad  clerk  whose 
work  requires  boldness,  strength,  speed  and  legibility, 
develops  a  style  that  requires  much  room  and  is  just  the 
opposite  of  effeminate.  The  telegraph  operator  be- 
comes so  accustomed  to  writing  five  words  to  a  line  on 
telegraph  blanks  that  he  must  resist  his  natural  impulse 
or  in  any  writing  his  hand  will  count  off  five  words  to 
a  line. 

The  attempt  to  disguise  a  handwriting  almost  inevi- 
tably shows  conspicuous  evidences  of  the  fixed  and  un- 
conscious character  of  these  various  habits;  that  is  dis- 
guised which  is  general  and  superficial,  and  that  which 
is  individual  and  specific  is  entirely  overlooked.  Illit- 
erate writers  especially  are  apt  to  incorporate  into  such 
writing  some  distinctly  individual  idiosyncrasies.  The 
writer  of  the  distinctive  angular  woman's  hand,  which  is 
usually  coarse  and  heavy  and  often  of  a  sprawling, 


WRITING  HABITS  145 

awkward,  unwomanly  character,  with  abnormally  wide 
spacing  between  words  and  between  lines  and  with  hori- 
zontal concluding  strokes  to  words,  will  almost  certainly 
carry  some  of  these  habits  into  a  disguised  document 
whatever  the  manner  or  method  of  the  disguise  adopted. 

Habits  of  arrangement  in  writing  and  general  habits 
of  neatness  undoubtedly  reflect  certain  individual  char- 
acteristics which  are  likely  to  be  shown  in  whatever  is 
done;  the  writer  who  is  methodical,  definite,  matter  of 
fact  and  practical  does  not  produce  that  with  his  hand 
which  is  slovenly  and  uncertain;  neither  do  the  bungler 
and  the  sloven  produce  a  page  of  writing  that  is  grace- 
ful, balanced  and  finished  without  excess.  Certainly 
to  the  extent  here  specified,  graphology  points  in  the 
right  direction  although  many  of  its  deductions  seem  to 
be  based  on  foundations  too  slender  for  scientific 
accuracy. 

Size  in  writing  is  a  characteristic  that  is  somewhat 
divergent  under  varying  conditions  and  may  have  but 
little  significance  when  applied  to  only  one  example  or 
to  a  small  quantity  of  writing  like  a  signature  unless 
the  divergence  is  very  pronounced.  But  if  a  number 
of  signatures  alleged  to  have  been  produced  at  different 
times  are  in  question,  or  even  two  or  three  are  under 
suspicion  and  they  are  like  each  other  in  the  matter  of 
size,  in  which  they  differ  from  all  admitted  standards, 
then  this  divergence  at  once  becomes  significant  in 
proportion  to  its  extent,  the  number  of  divergent  ex- 
amples and  the  number  of  standards.  This  is  also  true 
of  all  divergencies  in  writing,  which  in  one  instance  may 
have  little  force  but  in  combination  may  point  conclu- 
sively to  a  different  hand. 


146  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  various  parts  of  an  ordinary  signature  when  care- 
fully measured  bear  a  certain  proportion  to  each  other 
that  with  most  writers  is  found  to  be  surprisingly  uni- 
form. There  is  a  natural  divergence,  however,  within 
certain  limits,  and  an  occasional  exceptional  part,  and 
this  fact  makes  it  dangerous  to  base  a  conclusion  as  to 
genuineness  entirely  upon  a  few  measurements  of  size 
or  proportions.  Divergencies  or  similarities  that  can  be 
clearly  shown  may,  however,  strongly  confirm  other 
indications  of  genuineness  or  forgery. 

When  a  considerable  amount  of  writing  is  in  question 
and  an  adequate  amount  of  standard  writing  is  supplied 
for  comparison,  a  system  of  measurements  covering  a 
sufficient  number  of  features  and  examples  may  be  very 
forceful  evidence.  In  a  large  number  of  items  the  dis- 
turbing effect  of  an  occasional  exception  is  neutralized 
and  does  not  seriously  affect  the  general  result.  Any 
system  of  averages,  to  be  reliable,  must  be  based  on  an 
adequate  number  of  separate  examples. 

Genuine  writing  or  genuine  signatures  show  a  certain 
definite  and  fixed  proportion  of  height  of  letters  to 
length  of  words.  This  is  one  of  the  distinctive  ways  in 
which  the  general  appearance  of  a  page  of  writing  is 
changed  by  a  different  system  of  writing;  this 'change 
is,  however,  in  many  instances,  very  slight,  although  in 
combination  it  changes  the  general  appearance  of  writ- 
ing in  a  striking  manner.  Evidence  based  on  the  very 
great  number  of  minute  measurements  necessary  to 
show  a  very  slight  divergence  is  not  usually  of  much 
weight  in  this  or  any  similar  inquiry,  because  it  is 
practically  impossible  for  court  and  jury  to  review  and 
verify  the  basis  of  such  an  opinion.  If  the  difference 


WRITING  HABITS 


147 


is  apparent  by  inspection,  then  the  measurements  are  of 
value  in  making  definite  what  is  apparently  a  fact  with- 
out such  proof. 

Testimony  of  this  character  which  cannot  be  reviewed 
by  court,  jury  and  opposing  counsel,  belongs  in  that 
class  of  expert  tes- 
timony that  is  of 
slight  value  when 
conflicting  testi- 
mony is  given  by  a 
witness  who  is  ap- 
parently as  well 
qualified.  Not  much 
time  should  be  spent 
in  preparing  testi- 
mony regarding  a 
questioned  writing 
that  a  judge  or  a 
juryman  cannot 
see,  understand  and 
verify.  A  conflict 
of  testimony  in  such 
a  case  nullifies  it, 
which  is  not  true 
when  proper  illustrations  are  prepared  and  cogent  rea- 
sons are  given. 

The  different  systems  of  writing  differ  from  each 
other  in  size  and  proportions  in  certain  definite  and  dis- 
tinct ways,  and  such  system  characteristics  and  funda- 
mental divergencies  or  similarities  may  be  of  great  force 
in  differentiating  or  connecting  two  writings.  The 
presence  or  absence  of  these  fixed  system  characteristics 


FIG.  68 — Size  and  proportions.      Words  from 
business  envelopes. 


148 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


is  of  force  and  value  in  examining  even  one  signature  if 

an  adequate  number  of  standards  is  supplied  with  which 

it  may  be  compared. 

The  modern  vertical  writing  copy  books  and  models 

make  the  highest  of  the  small  letter  alphabet  only  twice 

as  high  as  the 
shortest  letters, 
and  the  longest 
letters  extend  be- 
low the  line  only 
one  space  or  the 
same  distance  the 
minimum  letters 
extend  above  the 
line,  the  whole 
field  of  writing 
covering  three 
equal  spaces,  two 
above  and  one  be- 
low the  base  line. 
The  immediately 
preceding  style  of 
writing,  or  so- 
called  Spencerian, 


^£££^£^ 


/ 


a 


£ 


TT-Tv Al^yi — "^ 


TTT 


LL 


^L 


sf 


FIG.  69 — Proportions  in  writing,  from  three  sys- 
tems, modern  vertical,  Spencerian,  and 
an  early  American  hand. 


was  arranged  on  a  scale  of  fifths,  three  above  and  two 
below  the  base  line,  the  longest  letters  being  three  spaces 
high  and  the  minimum  letters  one-third  as  high,  and  the 
lower  loop  letters  extending  two  spaces  below  the  base 
line.  Some  of  the  older  style  of  writing  made  loop 
letters  four  times  as  high  as  the  short  letters  and  small 
t's  and  d's  the  same  height  as  the  loop  letters,  differing 
radically  from  the  Spencerian  style  which  supplanted 


WRITING  HABITS  149 

this  old  writing.  The  small  "p"  in  the  early  style  of  this 
old  writing  was  made  like  the  printed  form  only  slight- 
ly, if  any,  higher  than  the  shortest  letters,  but  as  long 
below  the  line  as  the  loop  letters.  This  is  still  a  char- 
acteristic of  much  English  writing  and  is  also  one  of  the 


FIG.  70 — Examples  of  spacing  habits,  from  recent  business  writing. 

characteristics  of  the  awkward  modern  vertical  writing. 
The  spacing  of  writing  is  mainly  changed  by  the  slant 
of  the  upward  or  connecting  strokes.  Different  systems 
of  writing  vary  in  the  proportion  of  height  to  width  of 
letters.  The  old  round-hand  or  early  American  writing 
was  written  more  compactly  than  the  later  writing  which 
supplanted  it,  and  in  this  particular  the  modern  vertical 
is  similar  to  the  old  style.  This  compactness  was  secured 
by  making  upward  connecting  strokes  more  nearly 
vertical,  which  brought  the  letters  and  parts  of  letters 
closer  together,  the  result  being  that  the  small  or  mini- 
mum letters  were  higher,  in  proportion  to  width  of  let- 
ters and  length  of  words  than  in  the  later  writing  and 
all  angles  were  retraced  farther  ( Fig.  79 )  at  the  base  of 
such  small  letters  as  "n"  and  "m." 


150 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


This  spacing  characteristic  often  becomes  very  sig- 
nificant when  one  who  writes  the  Spencerian  system 
simulates  the  old  round-hand  style  of  writing  and  does 
not  understand  this  radical  and  significant  difference  in 
the  systems.  The  new  vertical  writing  is  in  spacing 
nearly  like  the  old  round-hand,  and  a  writer  of  this 
system  in  simulating  the  earlier  or  Spencerian  hand 
would  be  likely  to  fail  in  just  the  opposite  way  from 
the  Spencerian  writer  who  attempts  to  copy  the  old 
round-hand. 

Slant  in  writing  is  a  characteristic  that  becomes  high- 


FIG.  71 — Reproduction  of  glass  protractor  for  the  measurement  of 

writing  slant.    The  protractor  reads  to  one-half  degree 

and  can  be  used  to  measure  slant  to  the  right 

or  the  left  of  vertical. 


WRITING  HABITS  151 

ly  significant  under  certain  conditions  and  with  many 
writers  is  one  of  the  most  fixed  of  habits.  The  slight 
divergence  in  the  few  strokes  of  a  single  signature  may 
be  very  strong  evidence  of  lack  of  genuineness  when 
such  divergence  is  part  of  a  combination  of  charac- 
teristics pointing 
to  a  writer  of  a 
different  system 
of  writing  from  -  >^ 

that     imitated.  j^jf     ^/?^^      ^^ 

The  old  round- 
hand  system 
slanted  the 
straight  down- 
ward strokes 
from  about  fifty- 
six  to  nearly  sixty 
degrees  from  the 
horizontal.  The 
early  copy  books 
of  the  systems  of 
writing  that  final- 
ly entirely  SUp-  FIG.  72 —Examples  of  slant  ranging  from  35  degrees 

T  j       ,  i  IT  above  horizontal  to  the  right  to  56  degrees  to 

planted      the      Old  the   left  of  vertical.     These   specimens 

round-hand    var-  a11  taken  from  business  envel°Pes- 

ied  in  slant  from  forty-five  to  fifty-five  degrees  from 
the  horizontal,  but  the  copies  of  the  new  writing  which 
from  about  1860  to  1870  came  to  be  taught  in  practical- 
ly all  American  public  schools  were,  after  the  first  edi- 
tions, all  engraved  on  the  slant  of  fifty-two  degrees  for 
the  downward  strokes  and  about  thirty  degrees  for  the 
upward  strokes. 


fj  crUaUa^, 


< 


152 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


This  change  of  slant  gives  a  very  different  appear- 
ance to  a  page  or  any  considerable  quantity  of  writing 
and  is  a  matter  that  should  be  investigated  in  a  docu- 

^^^^^  ment  inquiry 
•&~*yt-tC*t£  especially  in 
anonymous  letter 
cases  or  any  in- 
vestigation involv- 
ing a  considerable 
amount  of  writ- 
ing. The  simulat- 
ing process  has  a 
tendency  to  pro- 

~~[T  l*^gZ   ^~  f          duce  formal,  stiff 

Jf    ^^          -Jstst^J^      writing,     and    a 
/T****'    L— _i  ?  fraudulent    signa- 

//  f~—  ture  of  this  class 

— — *J       -*~  ^*~      will    frequently 

diverge  from  the 
genuine  writing 
imitated  by  being 
written  with  less 
slant.  This  may 
be  one  of  the 
numerous  features, 
each  not  neces- 
sarily very  pro- 
nounced, but  all 
together  of  great  force,  that  may  lead  to  the  conclusion 
that  a  signature  is  not  genuine.  It  is  unusual  for  a 
forged  writing  to  slant  less  than  the  genuine  unless  the 
imitation  is  made  by  a  writer  who  writes  a  slant  hand 


FIG.  73 — Example  of  repeated  divergence  in  slant 
of  final  letter,  from  exhibits  in  case  of  New- 
comb  vs.  Burbank,  New  York  City,  1909. 


WRITING  HABITS  153 

and  attempts  to  imitate  a  more  vertical  writing  such  as 
the  old  round-hand  style  or  the  modern  vertical  system. 

Slant  would,  of  course,  have  little  or  no  significance 
in  connection  with  a  traced  forgery  inquiry.  It  is 
obvious  that  even  a  clumsy  forgery  of  this  kind  would 
approximate  the  slant  of  a  model  unless  in  the  case  of  a 
part  that  in  the  model  was  very  lightly  written  and  that 
could  not  be  distinctly  seen  through  the  paper.  In  the 
forgery  of  a  whole  document  slight  but  repeated  diverg- 
ence in  slant  of  the  same  letter  as  compared  with  the 
writing  imitated  may  be  a  strong  indication  of  a  lack 
of  genuineness  as  illustrated  in  Fig.  73. 

An  effective  illustration  showing  divergence  in  slant 
is  made  by  photographing  the  questioned  signature  or 
writing  and  the  standards  with  superimposed  glass 
carrying  parallel  lines,  perhaps  one-fourth  of  an  inch 
apart,  arranged  parallel  with  the  downward  strokes  of 
the  standard  writing.  This  effectively  assists  the  eye  to 
see  and  measure  the  difference  between  the  two  slants. 

A  glass  protractor,  like  that  shown  in  Fig.  70,  will 
be  found  very  useful  in  all  slant  examinations.  The  use 
of  this  instrument  makes  definite  any  general  statements 
on  the  subject.  It  will  be  observed  that  by  using  as 
base  lines  those  now  shown  in  a  vertical  position  the 
instrument  also  measures  slant  to  the  left  of  vertical. 


CHAPTER  X. 

WRITING  INSTRUMENTS 

The  effect  of  the  writing  instrument  upon  writing  as 
a  means  of  identifying  it  may  have  an  important  bear- 
ing as  evidence  in  a  case  of  disputed  writing.  It  is  often 
alleged  that  writing  was  produced  in  a  certain  manner 
or  in  a  certain  position  and  with  a  particular  pen  or 
pencil,  or  with  the  writing  instrument  in  a  particular 
condition,  and  since  it  is  sometimes  known  with  what 
instrument  and  under  what  conditions  the  writing  was 
done  if  it  is  genuine,  it  is  important  to  consider  the  in- 
trinsic evidence  in  the  writing  itself  pointing  to  the  in- 
strument or  the  conditions  under  which  it  was  produced. 

In  a  preceding  chapter  attention  was  called  to  the 
well  known  fact  that  an  ordinary  pen  point  is  in  reality 
two  points  which  make  one  stroke  or  line  of  writing. 


FIG.  74 — Enlargement  of  pen  points;    broad  stub,  Falcon,  Gil- 
lott's  604,  crow  quill. 

[154] 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS 


155 


Upon  close  examination  nearly  all  writing  with  such  a 
pen  will  show  at  some  place  the  marks  of  these  two 
points.  As  a  pen  becomes  old  or  is  injured  the  nibs  be- 
come separated  or  of  unequal  length  or  width  and  the 
pen  "scratches"  or  sticks  into  the  paper  and  may  in 


FIG.  75 — Width  of  pen  strokes,  actual  size  and  enlarged  nearly  five  diam- 
eters.   No.  1,  crow  quill,  width,  ^  inch;  No.  3,  Falcon  pen,  aver- 
age width,  T{-  inch;  No.  6,  broad  stub,  width,  ^  inch. 

rare  cases  show  a  double  line  even  on  unshaded  strokes. 

The  nib  marks  show  as  two  darkened  tracks  where 
more  ink  has  been  absorbed  than  at  the  middle  of  the 
stroke  ( Fig.  62 ) ,  and  are  caused  by  the  abrasion  of  the 
hard  pen  points  upon  the  paper,  making  it  more  porous 
along  the  tracks.  Such  marks  are  particularly  apparent 
if  a  blotter  has  been  applied  on  a  shaded  stroke  before 
the  ink  was  dry. 

Measured  across  both  nibs  where  they  begin  to  round 
off,  the  tips  of  pens  range  in  width  from  about  one- 
twenty-fifth  (1-25)  of  an  inch,  the  width  of  a  very  broad 
stub  pen,  to  about  one-three  hundredth  (1-300)  of  an 
inch,  the  width  of  the  finest  "crow  quill"  or  the  "No. 


156 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


1000"  steel  pen.  The  broad  pen  without  pressure  and 
with  ink  in  an  average  condition  of  fluidity,  makes  a  nor- 
mal stroke  about  one-thirtieth  (1-30)  of  an  inch  in  width 
and  the  crow  quill  pen  makes  a  stroke  of  about  one- 
three  hundred  and  thirtieth  (1-330)  of  an  inch  in  width 

(Fig.  75).  The 
common  Falcon 
pen,  which  is  con- 
sidered a  coarse 
pen,  has  a  point 
only  about  one- 
one  hundredth 
(1-100)  of  an  inch 
wide  and  makes  a 
normal  minimum 
stroke  not  quite  so 
wide.  The  surpris- 
ing narrowness  of 
such  strokes  is 
more  fully  appre- 
ciated when  only 
dots  are  examined. 
V  The  ordinary 

writing  pen  i  s 
sometimes  made 
with  the  left  nib 
slightly  longer  than  the  right  to  compensate  for  the 
common  custom  of  holding  the  pen  with  the  nibs  press- 
ing evenly  on  the  paper  but  somewhat  inclined  to  the 
right  in  the  direction  of  the  line  of  writing.  Stub  pens  are 
made  in  just  the  opposite  manner,  the  left  nib  being  the 
shorter  of  the  two  (Fig.  74)  to  allow  the  pen  to  be 


FIG.   76 — Characteristic    stub   pen   writing   with 
shading  on  strokes  to  left. 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS 


157 


turned  with  the  bottom 
or  concave  side  toward 
the  right,  or  in  the 
direction  of  the  writ- 
ing, in  which  position 
the  right  nib,  as  looked 
at  from  above,  must  be 
longer  in  order  to  reach 
the  paper.  Stub  pens 
are  designed  especially 
for  those  whose  habit 
it  is  to  hold  the  pen  far 
over  to  the  right  or 
between  the  first  and 
second  fingers.  The 
stub  pen,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  makes  a 
stroke  the  width  of  the 
point  when  the  direc- 
tion of  the  stroke  is  at 
right  angles  to  the  wide 
point  and  this  is  the  re- 
sult whether  the  stroke 
is  to  the  left,  right, 
upward  or  downward 
(Fig.  76).  Any  con- 
siderable quantity  of 
stub  pen  writing  and 
usually  even  a  small 
signature  written  with 
such  a  pen  will  show 
this  characteristic. 


&&./£ 


V 


FIG.  77 — Pen  marks  and  date  of  writing. 

Six  entries  alleged  to  have  been  made 

one  each  year  covering  a  period  of 

six  years.     All  written  with  the 

same  old  pen  and  thick  ink,  and 

undoubtedly  all  at  one  time. 


158 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Pens  of  the 
same  manufactur- 
er's number  and 
style  resemble  each 
other  very  closely 
but  do  not  all 
make  strokes  of 
just  the  same 
width,  and  careful 
measurements  and 
tests  often  show 
easily  observable 
differences.  This 
question  becomes 
important  in  the 
examination  of 
questioned  addi- 
tions to  documents 
where  it  is  reason- 
able to  assume 
that  ordinary  pru- 
dence would  sug- 
gest that  a  similar 
pen  should  be 
used.  It  is  some- 
times found  that 
such  questioned 
writing  shows 
throughout  a  dif- 
ferent average 
width  of  stroke  unless  not  only  the  same  kind  of 
a  pen  has  been  used  for  the  added  writing,  but  a 
pen  in  just  the  same  condition.  The  strokes  exam- 


FIG.   78  —  Comparison  of  width   of  pen  points. 
Gold  pen  with  special  point  and  old  corroded 
steel  pen.    From  exhibit  in  Matter  of  Fred- 
erick   C.    Hewitt   will,    Owego,    N.  Y. 
Photograph  enlarged  sixty  diameters. 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS  159 

ined  and  compared  should  be  those  made  without  pres- 
sure, in  the  same  direction,  and  showing  the  minimum 
average  width.  If  a  large  number  of  measurements  of 
such  strokes  is  made  a  uniform  and  accurate  average 
result  can  be  obtained.  The  microscope  is,  of  course,  in- 
dispensable for  such  examination  and  the  filar  micro- 
meter will  permit  the  examination  and  measurements  to 
be  tested  by  judge  and  jury.  When  it  is  alleged  that  a 
certain  pen  was  used  it  becomes  necessary  to  compare  in 
every  way  this  pen  with  the  work  it  is  alleged  to  have  done. 
In  some  cases  it  becomes  necessary  to  compare  two  pens 
with  each  other  and  also  to  compare  writings  alleged  to 
have  been  made  with  the  two  pens  (Fig.  78) .  The  differ- 
ence in  width  of  two  lines  of  one  one-hundredth  (1-100) 
and  one  one-hundred  and  fiftieth  (1-150)  of  an  inch  is 
not  easily  discernible  with  the  naked  eye  ( Fig.  36 ) ,  but 
when  measured  as  described  is  unmistakable. 

The  same  pen  may  at  a  subsequent  period  make  a 
very  different  stroke.  As  is  well  known  an  ordinary 
steel  pen  begins  to  deteriorate  gradually  from  the  time 
that  it  is  first  used  until  it  is  worn  out  or  spoiled.  The 
difference  between  the  stroke  of  a  new  pen  as  first  used, 
which  usually  is  covered  by  a  protecting  varnish,  and  the 
stroke  of  the  same  pen  after  being  used  on  only  one  or 
two  occasions  may  be  perfectly  apparent  if  sufficient 
matter  is  available  for  examination.  Unless  a  pen  is 
carefully  cleaned  at  once  after  being  used,  ordinary 
writing  fluid  attacks  the  metal  and  if  the  ink  is  allowed 
to  dry  on  the  pen  it  will  not  write  again  exactly  as  it 
did  on  the  first  occasion.  When  a  pen  finally  becomes 
thickly  coated  with  dried  ink  it  will  necessarily  make  a 
very  different  stroke  from  that  made  when  it  is  new, 


160  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

and  when  it  becomes  rusted  or  corroded  by  the  action 
of  the  acid,  which  all  fluid  ink  contains,  it  is  of  course 
greatly  changed.  If  a  pen  is  held  incorrectly  its  life  is 
much  shortened  and  its  work  may  very  soon  show  a 
decided  difference  in  result.  These  questions  are  of 
special  importance  in  the  investigation  of  continuity  of 
writing,  interlineations  and  all  similar  inquiries.  The 
work  of  a  peculiar  pen  may  be  the  means  of  identifying 
a  writing  or  may  show  that  it  was  written  continuously 
(Fig.  77). 

The  so-called  "stylographic  pen"  was  very  popular 
some  years  age,  but  has  nearly  been  displaced  by  the 
improved  fountain  pens.  The  stylographic  pen  is  a 
hollow  cylinder  or  holder  brought  down  to  a  point  from 
which  projects  a  short  blunt  needle  or  stopper  which 
prevents  the  ink  from  running  out.  When  the  point  is 
pressed  on  the  paper  the  needle  is  pushed  back  allowing 
the  ink  to  escape.  Writing  with  this  pen  shows  a  broad 
line,  practically  of  uniform  width,  no  matter  in  what 
direction  it  is  made,  and  with  no  nib  marks,  but  is  of 
uniform  intensity  throughout  its  whole  width  like  a 
stroke  made  with  a  brush. 

The  pens  used  in  ordinary  fountain  holders  are  made 
of  gold  tipped  with  iridosmine,  described  as  a  native 
alloy  of  two  metals,  iridium  and  osmium,  and  harder 
than  steel.  It  can  be  soldered  to  gold  and  therefore 
supplies  a  tip  for  gold  pens  that  is  practically  indestruc- 
tible by  ordinary  wear.  Writing  done  with  a  good  gold 
pen  cannot  ordinarily  be  distinguished  from  writing 
done  with  a  good  steel  pen,  except  under  certain  condi- 
tions. Some  years  ago  a  very  frequent  characteristic 
shown  in  the  writing  of  fountain  pens  was  a  failure  to 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS  161 

write  promptly  when  the  pen  was  first  applied  to  the 
paper  and  this  may  indicate  that  writing  was  probably 
done  with  a  fountain  pen.  A  poor  or  cheap  fountain 
pen  will  sometimes  show  very  plainly  this  characteristic 
failure  to  write  promptly. 

Many  men  now  living  learned  to  write  with  quill  pens 
at  a  time  when  these  pens  were  in  almost  universal  use. 
Mending  and  making  pens  was  a  regular  part  of  the 
school  teacher's  work  in  those  days.  Quills  prepared 
for  pen  making  can  still  be  bought  in  many  places  but 
are  not  now  in  use  in  America  except  on  the  stage. 
In  England  quill  pens  are  still  in  common  use 
in  the  law  courts.  Some  old  people  in  America,  no 
doubt  partly  in  reverence  for  the  past,  continued  to  use 
quill  pens  for  many  years  after  steel  pens  were  almost 
universally  used. 

In  the  examination  of  very  old  documents  it  is  some- 
times necessary  to  examine  the  characteristics  of  quill 
pen  writing.  The  quill  pen  is  much  more  flexible  than 
a  steel  or  metal  pen  of  any  kind  and  an  absence  of  nib 
marks  even  on  very  heavy  shadings  is  one  of  the  first 
characteristic  differences  to  consider.  This  softness  and 
flexibility  also  almost  necessitated  a  shading  of  the 
downward  strokes,  which  is  another  characteristic  of 
quill  pen  writing,  as  it  was  of  the  systems  of  writing 
used  in  the  quill  pen  days.  Quill  pen  writing  also  allows 
a  variety  of  shaded  strokes  not  possible  with  a  steel  pen. 
The  wide  shading  of  lateral  flourished  strokes  especially 
at  ends  of  letters  or  words  was  very  common.  A  single 
capital  letter  made  with  a  quill  pen  may  show  shadings 
nearly  at  right  angles  to  each  other  which  were  evidently 
made  without  changing  the  position  of  the  pen,  the 


162  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

flexibility  of  the  points  permitting  the  variation.  It 
is  thus  impossible  to  reproduce  certain  engraved  plates 
of  old  penmanship  with  a  metal  pen  without  changing 
the  position  of  the  pen  on  certain  letters.  Quill  pens 
were  also  very  frail,  and  it  was  frequently  necessary 
to  repair  them  and  this  often  made  a  decided  change  in 
the  appearance  of  parts  of  the  same  document. 

Pencils  are  used  for  so  many  different  purposes  that 
it  is  inevitable  that  pencil  writing  should  often  be  ques- 
tioned, and  it  is  necessary  to  consider  its  characteristics. 
As  is  well  known  ordinary  pencil  writing  is  produced 
by  wearing  off  a  continuous  succession  of  small  parti- 
cles of  graphite  or  plumbago  which  cling  to  or  become 
imbedded  in  the  fiber  of  the  paper.  Such  a  line  differs 
greatly  from  a  pen  line  and  has  certain  well  defined 
characteristics.  Magnification  of  a  stroke  shows  its 
peculiar  construction;  it  is  seen  not  to  be  solid  like  a 
pen  stroke  but  resembles  a  line  that  might  be  formed  by 
grouping  small  particles  of  coal  or  black  stones  on  a 
white  surface.  The  number  of  small  particles  making 
up  the  line  is  very  great  and  it  is  almost  impossible  to 
remove  them  all  by  the  use  of  an  ordinary  rubber  eraser. 
The  eraser  removes  at  once  the  larger  particles,  but 
breaks  them  up  somewhat  and  leaves  imbedded  and 
caught  in  the  fibers  of  the  paper  hundreds  of  particles 
of  graphite  which  can  easily  be  seen  with  the  microscope. 
All  of  a  pencil  mark  can  be  removed  by  the  ordinary 
eraser  by  actually  wearing  away  the  whole  paper  sur- 
face by  abrasion,  but  this  will  show  plainly  a  disturbance 
of  the  paper  fibers  and  indicate  that  an  erasure  has  been 
made.  It  is  usually  possible  to  distinguish  the  remnants 
of  a  pencil  mark  from  ordinary  dirt  or  finger  marks. 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS  163 

Because  of  the  manner  in  which  a  pencil  line  is  pro- 
duced it  is  sometimes  possible  to  determine  in  which 
direction  the  stroke  was  made  by  the  location  and  ar- 
rangement of  the  particles  of  graphite  as  seen  under  the 
microscope.  This  fact  may  have  an  important  bearing 
on  the  investigation  of  a  pencil  writing.  If  a  black  line 
is  drawn  on  a  rough  surface  like  matting  with  a  very 
large  crayon  the  particles  making  the  line  will  be  pressed 
against  the  sides  of  the  obstructions  on  the  side  from 
which  the  stroke  is  made  and  this  is  also  true  with  pencil 
strokes  on  paper;  the  collections  of  particles  will  tend 
to  form  a  straight  line  next  to  the  ridges  against  which 
they  are  pressed. 

More  pressure  is  ordinarily  required  to  produce  pencil 
writing  than  pen  writing  and  it  is  sometimes  sufficient 
to  indent  the  paper  so  that  it  shows  on  the  opposite  side 
of  the  sheet.  Indentations  are  sometimes  present  in 
traced  forgeries  and  should  always  be  looked  for.  Illit- 
erate pencil  writing  is  usually  produced  with  much  pres- 
sure and  may  show  plainly  the  habit  of  frequently  wet- 
ting the  pencil.  In  attempted  disguises  of  pencil  writ- 
ing changes  are  sometimes  made  and  the  first  writing 
as  partly  erased  may  be  legible  from  the  indentations 
that  still  remain  after  the  lines  have  been  nearly  re- 
moved. The  indentations,  or  any  unevenness  of  any 
kind,  can  be  plainly  seen  by  the  aid  of  the  stereoscopic 
microscope,  or  may  be  seen  or  photographed  by  lighting 
the  document  all  from  one  side  with  the  angle  of  light 
almost  parallel  with  the  surface  of  the  paper,  when  a 
shadow  will  appear  in  the  indentations.  It  is  not  usually 
advisable  in  photographing  pencil  writing  for  a  better 
study  of  the  form,  to  enlarge  it  as  much  as  pen  and  ink 


164  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

writing  may  be  enlarged  because  under  great  magnifica- 
tion the  pencil  line  may  become  so  thin  as  to  be  some- 
what illegible. 

An  inquiry  sometimes  arises  as  to  whether  two  writ- 
ings were  produced  by  the  same  ordinary  lead  pencil. 
This  question  can  be  answered  only  and  so  far  as  the 
difference  in  the  hardness,  due  to  the  proportion  of  clay 
to  graphite,  may  affect  the  width,  character  and  in- 
dentation of  the  strokes.  The  attempt  to  analyze  an 
ordinary  pencil  stroke  for  the  purpose  of  showing  iden- 
tity or  difference  in  two  writings,  as  in  the  case  of  an 
ink  line,  is  an  unprecedented  operation. 

It  is  sometimes  possible  to  show  lack  of  continuity  in 
writing  claimed  to  be  continuous,  by  the  differences  in 
line  quality,  width  and  character  of  stroke;  or  a  strik- 
ing and  unnatural  uniformity  may  be  apparent  in  a 
number  of  pencil  book  entries  or  other  writings  which 
it  is  claimed  were  all  written  at  different  times  on  the 
dates  they  bear,  but  which  show  identical  conditions  as 
to  width,  indentation,  depth  of  color,  luster,  care  and 
speed. 

Without  a  reasonable  explanation  the  fact  that  a 
disputed  document  which  is  the  basis  of  a  claim  of 
any  considerable  importance  is  written  in  pencil  is  a 
suspicious  circumstance  in  itself1.  There  are  cases, 
however,  where  a  plausible  explanation  is  offered  for 
the  use  of  a  pencil,  in  which  case  it  becomes  necessary 


xNo  prudent  scrivener  will  write  a  will  in  pencil,  unless  under 
extreme  circumstances.  Whenever  [thus]  written,  any  appearance  of 
alteration  should  be  carefully  scrutinized.  Yet  inasmuch  as  the  statute 
is  silent  on  the  question,  we  cannot  say  the  mere  fact  that  it  is  written 
or  signed  in  pencil,  thereby  makes  its  invalid. — Myers  vs.  Vanderbilt, 
84  Penn.  St.  Rep.  510  (1877). 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS  165 

to  determine  whether  a  pencil  writing  is  genuine  or 
fraudulent. 

Without  doubt  it  is  much  easier  to  produce  a  forgery 
with  a  pencil  than  with  pen  and  ink.  Pencil  writing 
does  not  show  halting,  tremor,  lack  of  continuity,  pen- 
lifts,  pen  position,  retouching  and  overwriting  as  dis- 
tinctly as  pen  writing  shows  these  conditions,  and 
differences  in  color  and  weight  of  line  are  not  nearly 
so  plainly  seen  in  pencil  as  in  pen  writing.  In  pen 
writing,  as  we  have  seen,  the  relation  of  the  mark  of  the 
two  nibs  of  the  pen  to  the  direction  of  the  stroke  shows 
how  the  pen  is  held  in  relation  to  the  paper,  and  is  often 
a  means  of  showing  very  divergent  habits  in  two  writ- 
ings, but  in  pencil  writing  the  position  of  the  pencil  can- 
not be  thus  determined  from  an  examination  of  the 
strokes.  These  facts  must  all  be  considered  in  examin- 
ing a  questioned  pencil  writing. 

The  fact,  however,  that  pencil  writing  is  more  easily 
retouched  and  perfected  apparently  has  an  almost  un- 
controllable tendency  to  lead  the  fabricator  of  the 
writing  to  excess  in  this  direction,  and  such  a  document 
often  is  so  laboriously  overwritten  and  perfected  in 
every  detail  that  its  fraudulent  character  is  thus  con- 
clusively shown.  Convincing  evidences  of  genuineness 
in  all  kinds  of  written  documents  are  indications  of 
carelessness  and  disregard  of  minor  and  unimportant 
details  in  connection  with  close  adherence  to  form  de- 
signs, and  the  opposite  characteristics  are  always  sus- 
picious. Reserve  and  self-control  are  rare  qualities  in 
the  forger  and  the  very  act  itself,  with  attention  neces- 
sarily fixed  on  the  process,  leads  to  excessive  perfection 
of  details,  and  this  is  particularly  true  of  pencil  writing. 


166  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Every  part  of  every  stroke  of  a  disputed  pencil  writ- 
ing should  be  carefully  examined  with  the  microscope, 
under  various  magnifications  and  with  a  good  light,  to 
see,  if  possible,  whether  the  various  strokes  are  the  re- 
sult of  one  continuous  motion  or  whether  they  are  made 
up  of  several  patches  or  disconnected  movement  im- 
pulses. It  is  also  very  important  to  study  the  composi- 
tion of  the  strokes  themselves,  to  observe  the  degree  of 
uniformity  in  the  distribution  of  the  particles  of 
graphite  making  up  the  strokes,  and,  as  far  as  possible, 
to  determine  the  direction  of  the  various  strokes.  The 
stereoscopic  microscope  will  be  found  very  useful  for 
these  purposes. 

Carefully  made  photographs  enlarged  from  three  to 
five  diameters  will  sometimes  be  found  very  effective  in 
showing  retouching  and  lack  of  continuity  in  pencil 
writing.  The  photographs  should  be  made  so  as  to 
show  the  utmost  detail  in  the  line  itself  and  care  should 
be  taken  that  they  are  not  overprinted.  An  actual  size 
photograph  of  a  well  executed  pencil  forgery  may  not 
show  suspicious  conditions  that  would  be  clearly  shown 
by  good  enlarged  photographs  or  that  are  apparent 
when  a  careful  examination  of  the  original  writing  is 
made.  In  a  preliminary  inquiry  based  on  photographs 
of  pencil  writing  opinions  must  always  be  qualified  by 
the  statement  that  it  is  assumed  that  the  photograph  is 
a  faithful  and  adequate  reproduction  of  the  original. 
An  opinion  based  enirely  on  photographs  of  any  kind 
of  writing  should  always  be  thus  qualified,  but  it  is 
particularly  important  that  this  be  done  in  a  pencil 
writing  inquiry. 

Pencil  writing  may,  like  pen  writing,  be  very  de- 


WRITING  INSTRUMENTS  167 

fective  in  design,  as  compared  with  the  standard  writ- 
ing which  it  is  made  to  imitate,  and  the  standard  and 
disputed  writing  should  both  be  carefully  analyzed  and 
then  compared  in  every  particular.  It  is  naturally  desir- 
able in  such  cases  that  some  of  the  standards  of  compari- 
son should  be  in  pencil,  especially  if  pencil  writings  of 
importance  and  similar  in  character  to  the  writing  in 
question  can  be  found.  It  may  be  that  pencil  standards 
are  all  careless  and  unimportant  writings  of  a  distinctly 
different  class  from  the  writing  in  question,  and  it  is 
clearly  important  under  such  conditions  that  some 
formal  pen  writings  should  also  be  used  as  standards. 
The  fact,  however,  that  no  important  pencil  writings 
can  be  found  makes  it  all  the  more  imperative  that  an 
adequate  explanation  be  given  why  an  important  docu- 
ment was  written  with  a  pencil. 

Writings  produced  with  ordinary  copying  pencils 
may,  like  ink  writing,  show  perfectly  evident  differences 
in  color,  and  such  pencil  writings  under  chemical  reac- 
tions may  show  identities  or  differences  in  a  more  pro- 
nounced manner.  Alleged  old  book  entries  and  records 
made  with  aniline  copying  pencils  have  been  shown  to 
be  false  because  they  bore  a  date  before  such  pencils 
came  into  use. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

American  handwriting  shows  more  frequent  and  more 
radical  changes  during  our  comparatively  short  history 
than  the  handwriting  of  any  other  people  during  any 
period  of  time  of  the  same  length.  This  is  not  a  fact 
of  mere  general  interest,  but  has  an  important  bearing 
upon  the  investigation  of  many  disputed  writings. 
These  many  changes  have  undoubtedly  made  it  easier 
to  identify  and  prove  American  handwriting  than  that 
of  any  other  nation.  The  periods  covered  so  overlap 
each  other  that  there  are  now  living  writers  of  all  the 
varied  types;  there  are  definite  dates  when  many  styles 
and  forms  were  actually  invented  and  adopted,  and 
naturally  the  great  majority  of  writers  of  each  class  are 
not  fully  aware  of  these  various  fundamental  distinc- 
tions. To  be  entirely  successful  the  forger  must,  in 
many  instances,  have  some  historical  knowledge  of 
American  writing. 

The  framework  or  general  character  of  the  handwrit- 
ing of  the  average  writer  is  of  the  style  or  design  ac- 
quired in  youth  and  in  general  use  during  the  formative 
period  of  life1.  This  style  is  afterwards  greatly  modi- 

1For  although  each  person  (not  a  professed  scribe),  in  practising 
the  art  of  writing1,  has  invariably  had  a  style  marked  by  certain  in- 
dividual characters,  yet  each  example  is  stamped  with  the  general  im- 
press of  the  age  in  which  the  writers  lived;  and  thus,  though  different 
in  detail,  all  private  handwriting,  of  the  fifteenth  century,  for  instance, 
has,  overlying  the  individual  peculiarities,  a  general  character  belong- 
ing to  the  age;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  the  sixteenth  century  and 
subsequent  periods. — The  Origin  and  Progress  of  the  Art  of  Writing, 
by  Henry  Noel  Humphreys,  London,  1854. 
[168J 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  169 

fied  by  individual  taste,  physical  characteristics,  and 
environment,  but  through  all  these  changes  the  original 
system  will  visibly  protrude  as  a  foreign  accent  will 
show  in  speech.  The  forger  may  approximate  the  gen- 
eral form  of  a  writing  in  an  imitation,  but  will  often 
omit  the  significant  "accent"  that  gives  the  unmistakable 
touch  of  genuineness.  It  will  thus  be  seen  how  important 
it  is  in  the  identification  of  a  handwriting,  first,  if  pos- 
sible, to  classify  it  by  putting  it  into  its  proper  general 
division  as  to  date,  system,  and  nationality. 

Certain  writing  features  point  conclusively  to  foreign 
influences  and  others  to  a  definite  period  of  time.  Some 
of  these  apparent  peculiarities  in  two  handwritings 
may  be  simply  the  traces  of  the  former  style  or  "accent" 
still  appearing,  and,  where  writing  is  being  used  to  iden- 
tify an  individual,  the  unskilled  observer  may  conclude 
that  these  peculiarities  are  personal  individualities. 
Absence  of  these  characteristics  may  be  very  forcible 
evidence  in  proving  a  handwriting  not  to  be  genuine,  but 
are  not  alone  sufficient  to  prove  that  two  writings  are  ^ 
necessarily  by  the  same  writer.  One  who  attempts  to 
give  an  opinion  as  to  the  identity  of  two  writings  should 
be  able  to  give  fundamental  reasons  and  not  depend 
merely  upon  superficial  resemblances  or  differences. 

The  foreigner  who  has  learned  to  speak  and  write  his 
mother  tongue  brings  with  him  into  any  new  country  his 
accent  and  his  style  of  writing  and  it  is  seldom  indeed 
that  in  either  he  discards  entirely  the  fixed  habits  of  his 
youth.  There  are,  in  fact,  many  striking  analogies  be- 
tween writing  and  speech,  two  of  these  being  the  per- 
sistence with  which  habits  acquired  in  youth  are  retained 
and  the  partial  or  total  unconsciousness  of  them.  What- 


170  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ever  he  says,  as  soon  as  he  speaks  a  man  begins  to  tell 
where  he  was  born  and  what  his  education  and  environ- 
ment have  been,  and  by  his  writing  he  does  much  the 
same  thing. 

Habits  of  speech  and  writing  become  so  automatic 
and  unconscious  that  even  by  the  most  strenuous  effort 
it  is  almost  impossible  to  change  them.  This  is  well 
known  regarding  speech  and  is  also  shown  to  be  as  true 
of  writing  when  a  careful  study  is  made  of  it. 

Not  only  may  the  speech  and  writing  of  any  particu- 
lar nationality  be  distinguished,  of  one  who  has  after- 
wards learned  the  American  language,  but,  as  has  been 
suggested,  American  writing  itself,  as  shown  by  many 
historical  characteristics,  can  be  separated  into  distinct 
dated  periods  of  time.  The  handwritings  of  Magna 
Charta,  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  the  Let- 
ters of  Junius  date  those  documents,  and  the  writing 
of  our  grandfathers,  like  their  cravats  and  their  trousers, 
connects  them  with  the  past  and  with  that  period  of  our 
history  when  English  and  American  writing  were  al- 
most identical.  Handwriting  can  be  put  into  its  date 
class,  within  a  certain  definite  period,  as  a  skilled  philolo- 
gist can  classify  speech,  and  the  different  periods  in  this 
country  of  changes  cover  only  a  comparatively  short 
time1. 

There  are  four  main  divisions  in  American  writing. 
The  writing  of  most  writers  who  learned  to  write  in  this 

*A  true  connoisseur  in  these  studies  will  rather  agree  in  opinion 
with  Mr.  Casley,  who,  in  his  preface  to  the  catalogue  of  the  Royal 
library  (p.  6)  has  the  following  words:  "I  have  studied  that  point  so 
much,  and  have  so  often  compared  manuscripts  without  date,  with 
those  that  happen  to  have  a  date,  that  I  have  little  doubt  as  to  that 
particular."  And  he  observes,  that  "he  can  judge  of  the  age  of  a 
manuscript  as  well  as  the  age  of  a  man." — The  Origin  and  Progress 
of  Writing,  by  Thomas  Astle,  London,  1784. 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


171 


country  before  about  1830  to  1840  differs  in  many 
particulars  from  the  writing  of  those  who  learned  to 
write  during  the  period  from  about  1840  to  1865;  an- 
other and  more  radical  change  was  made  during  the 
years  from  about  1865  to  1890,  and  a  later  and  very 
radical  change,  the  fourth,  came  between  1890  and  1900. 
The  nineteenth  century  alone  thus  shows  these  four  dis- 
tinct classes  of  writing. 

The  first  division,  or  that  of  the  early  part  of  the 
century,  retained  the  old  English  round  hand  charac- 
teristics, and  in  numerous  ways  resembles  some  of  the 
English  writing  of  to-day.  This  old  style  (Figs.  79,  80) 
is  still  written  by  many  old  people  in  America. 

The  second  division  is  a  modified  round  hand  (Figs. 


Round  Hand. 


f/  *'  *>  m/ic^ 
*f^Mp0&s&y&z?. 

Italian  Hand~ 

'  •  •  '*  /  * '  /'' 

iJMd£$mmi^  . 

\wj~f^^^//i% 


FIG.  79 — English  hands  from  Bickham's  "Universal  Penman,"  London,  1743. 

The  "Round  Hand"  and  "Italian  Hand"  show  only  slight  differences 

and  are  both  usually  described  as  Round  Hand,  although 

both  were  developed  from  an  early  Italian  style. 


172  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

81  to  84)  and  includes,  among  others,  the  early  editions 
of  the  Spencerian  and  the  Payson,  Dunton  and  Scribner 
copy-books.  This  division  began  quite  early  in  the 
century  until  the  systematizing  of  the  new  copy-books 
had  developed  an  entire  new  American  handwriting. 

The  third  division,  or  what  is  commonly  called  Spen- 
cerian, brought  forward  an  entirely  new  alphabet  of 
letter  forms  ( Figs.  85,  86 )  and  many  other  distinct  and 
entirely  new  features.  It  came  about  through  the  de- 


.///  <wv  tyy  fir  Ifoaruf  Smut 


a        r  s    e        y       /     >        //+  // 

/  /~  u  r  ;/>  ,r       ~  tfr.     /  23  4        '   (9     /c. 


Thf  J(a/ia.n, 


a 


/l/rt  u    aawt  a  /vy 


FIG.  80— American  Round  Hand  and  Italian  Hand   from   "The   Young 
Man's  Best  Companion,"  by  George  Fisher,  Philadelphia,  1737. 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  173 

development  and  modification  of  the  two  leading  copy- 
book systems  in  the  direction  of  simplicity,  by  the  omis- 
sion of  extra  strokes  and  flourishes,  and  a  general  ten- 
dency toward  plain  letters. 

The  fourth  and  last  division  of  the  century  covers  the 
development  during  the  last  few  years  of  modern  verti- 
cal writing  ( Fig.  89 ),  an  entirely  new  style,  which  will 
affect  the  handwriting  of  this  country  with  more  or  less 
force  for  the  next  seventy-five  years. 

The  angular  style  of  writing  taught  to  and  written  by 
many  women  during  all  the  last  century  is  entirely  dis- 
tinct from  these  four  classes  just  described;  and  the 
many  foreign  hands  which  have  been  brought  into 
America  during  the  same  time  have  necessarily  affected 
writing  in  this  country  to  some  extent. 

Distinctions  in  all  these  different  classes  of  handwrit- 
ing of  one  nation  at  different  periods  or  of  different 
nationalities  are  not,  as  many  suppose,  simply  in  a  few 
forms  or  patterns  of  letters,  which  it  is  assumed  may 
be  fleeting  and  easily  modified ;  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
many  of  the  changes  are  much  more  fundamental,  and 
affect  writing  in  a  more  distinct  way.  Among  these 
pronounced  differences  in  general  features  are  the  pro- 
portions of  letters  to  each  other,  turns  and  angles  or 
relations  of  downward  and  upward  strokes,  spacing  of 
letters  in  words,  shading,  slant,  ornamentation  or  grace 
lines,  habits  of  lifting  the  pen  or  pen  stops,  and  manner 
of  writing  or  movement.  Even  the  unskilled  observer 
is  easily  able  to  recognize  the  fact  that  even  a  small  piece 
of  writing  is  of  a  foreign  character  or  of  an  ancient 
style,  and  the  specialist  must  analyze  these  distinctions 
and  show  exactly  from  what  causes  they  arise. 


174  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Until  about  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the 
handwriting  of  America  was  practically  identical  with 
that  of  England.  The  relations  of  the  two  countries 
were  so  close  that  handwriting,  like  speech,  had  little 
opportunity  for  individual  development.  After  the 
American  revolution,  however,  there  was  a  noticeable 
tendency  in  this  country  toward  individual  development 
in  every  direction,  and  this  included  to  some  extent  the 
subject  of  handwriting. 

During  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth,  numerous  American  works 
on  the  subject  of  writing  were  published.  These  at  first 
were  practically  the  same  as  the  old  English  publica- 
tions, but  some  originality  began  gradually  to  appear 
until  there  was  finally  developed  a  quite  distinctive 
modified  round  hand  style.  It  was  not,  however,  till 
many  years  later  than  an  entirely  new  American  hand- 
writing was  fully  developed.  This  came  about  through 
a  number  of  contributing  causes. 

Improvement,  in  the  methods  of  reproducing  and 
printing  copperplate  engraving  by  lithography  was  un- 
doubtedly one  of  the  principal  factors  in  this  develop- 
ment. This  improvement  led  to  the  publication  of  copy- 
books with  a  printed  copy  at  the  top  of  each  page1.  Be- 


xNo  attempt  is  here  made  to  write  a  history  of  American  hand- 
writing except  as  it  has  a  bearing  on  questioned  documents,  or  to 
revive  the  old  copy-book  controversies.  The  various  systems  of 
modern  writing-  came  finally  to  be  described  as  a  whole  as  Spencerian. 
This  no  doubt  was  due  to  the  superiority  of  the  system  and,  in  large 
neasure,  to  its  able  and  energetic  authors  and  advocates,  several  of 
whom  are  still  living. 

The  earliest  Spencerian  publication  was  a  series  of  copy  slips 
published  in  1848,  three  years  before  the  first  publication  of  P.  D.  & 
S.,  but  to  the  latter  belongs  the  distinction  of  issuing  in  1851  the  first 
modern  copy-books,  the  improvement  of  which  in  both  systems  revolu- 
tionized American  handwriting. 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


175 


fore  this  time  part  of  the  regular  work  of  the  schoolmas- 
ter was  to  "set  copies"  for  his  pupils;  this  practice  made 
it  impossible  for  any  wide-spread  revolution  to  be  made 
in  the  system  of  writing  taught  and  practiced  because 


/    /    '  //^7~~—^     SS 

*t6J,^tsW  ^x^^^^-^V^ 


.     .    . 


FIG.  81 — Spencerian  writing  of  1855.     A  comparison  of  this  writing  with  that  shown 

in  Fig.  85  will  show  what  a  change  was  made  between  1855 

and  1874  in  Spencerian  writing. 


FIG.  82— Modified  Round  Hand.     Potter  &  Hammond  System,  1858. 


FIG.  83— American  Writing,  Second  Division,  published  by  "Spencerian,' 
1864.     Double  beginning  ovals,  (  V2  size) . 


176 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  84 — American   Writing  (3d  Division),  pub- 
lished by  "P.  D.  &  S.,"  1857.     See  begin- 
ning ovals  and  ending  flourish  on 
capital  letters,  (^3  size). 


it  was  all  in  the 
hands  of  the  in- 
dividual school 
teachers.  But 
after  the  general 
adoption  of  copy- 
books as  a  means 
of  teaching  the 
forms  of  letters, 
the  style  of  the 
writing  of  the 
schools  of  the 
land  was  deter- 
mined by  authors, 
engravers  and 
publishers  and 
not  by  school- 
masters. This 
condition  still 
continues. 

Between    1850 


and  1860  two  competing  systems  of  copy-books  were 
published  in  America  and  were  so  industriously  pro- 
moted that  before  1870  their  adoption  in  America  was 
almost  universal.  These  two  systems  were  the  Spen- 
cerian  and  the  Payson,  Dunton  and  Scribner.  Each 
claimed  priority  and  superiority,  but  apparently  they 
copied  from  each  other  continuously,  and  certainly  both 
became  radically  different  from  what  they  were  at  the 
beginning  (Figs.  83,  84)  and  more  and  more  like  each 
other  and  finally  came  to  be  practically  identical  as  far 
as  forms  and  systems  were  concerned.  Together  they 
formed  a  distinctive,  new  American  handwriting. 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


177 


The  first  editions  of  these 
copy-books  were  but  little 
changed  from  much  of  the  old 
writing  taught  in  America 
during  the  first  half  of  the 


us/     ( 


7-7 


//      ////// 


//  /y 


/    y 


FIG.  85 — The  Spencerian  letters,  showing 
proportions  ( 1874) . 


century.  This  old  writing  was 
much  shaded,  had  large  and 
flourished  capitals,  which  var- 
ied greatly  in  proportions  and 
size  as  compared  with  each 
other,  and  loops  of  small  let- 
ters were  very  long  and  the 
writing  was  not  systematized 
as  the  new  writing  soon  came 


FIG.  86— The  "P.  D.  &  S."  capital  let- 
ters showing  proportions  (1890). 
Note  similarity  of  Spen- 
cerian and  P.  D.  &  S. 


178 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


to  be.  This  intermediate  stage  is  here  described  as  the 
second  division  of  American  handwriting  or  the  new 
modified  round  hand  (Figs.  82,  84). 

Competition  of  the  two  new  systems  was  very  fierce 
and  a  constant  effort  was  made  toward  making  the  new 
writing  systematic  and  uniform  with  itself  and  gradual- 
ly but  finally  the  old  forms  were  all  swept  away  and 
an  entirely  new  style  of  writing  was  made,  which  dif- 
fered in  nearly  all  particulars  from  the  old  hand  it  dis- 


0 


f 


7 


0 


FIG.  87 — Modern  American  Writing,  engraved  from  pen  and  ink  copy  by 
E.  C.  Mills,  Penman,  Rochester,  N.  Y.  (1909). 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


179 


placed,  especially  the  early  old  round  hand,  so  that 
American  handwriting  was  completely  revolutionized. 
The  new  writing  as  finally  perfected  was  in  certain 
features  intermediate  between  two  previous  styles,  the 
round  hand  which  was  legible  but  slow,  and  the  angular 
hand,  which  was  more  rapid  but  difficult  to  read.  The 
distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  new  writing,  as  com- 
pared with  the  early  round  hand,  was  the  narrow  turns 
or  angles  of  the  connecting  lines  due  to  the  straighten- 
ing of  the  connecting  strokes.  The  theory  developed 
in  the  new  writing  was  that  connecting  turns  were  to 
be  made  nearly  angular  but  sufficiently  rounded  to  en- 
able the  pen  to  make  a  continuous  motion,  it  being 
maintained  with  good  reason  that  the  roundness  would 
give  the  legibility  of  the  round  hand,  and  the  narrow- 
ness of  the  turns  (Fig.  85)  would  make  nearly  a  direct 


FIG.  88  —  Modern  American  shaded  capitals  of  the  general  style  of  letters 
taught  in  American  commercial  schools  from  about  1885. 


180  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

stroke     which 


-— -        •     ^— — "  •»• — <^_-^v — x-\_x  ,     v^A^/    I 

would  make  pos- 


writing.  (Jo  CO  CL 

The  new  writ-       c~. 

ing  slanted  fifty-  UjZ^Oe  LOT  Qjujljto  U& 
two  degrees  from 
the  horizontal, 
was  finally  con- 
structed on  a 
scale  of  fifths, 
three  above  and  H  °"LCL  ^  U 


Cjo£dla> 


line,  had  but  little 
shading  on  the 
small  letters,  fur- 


nished  a  new  set        Q_  «r|~         "1  I  YL 

f       ..  ,• ,  j  /ra/TT\j2x<6  La     UJruu 

ot  capital  letters,       c/ 


and  was  written 
more  open  or 
with  wider  spaces  f  0  n  rr.  U  (rLorua/rr 

1  n  n  cjOOLA/  I    U 

between  all  small 
letters   than   the      TfLcu/TLe, 
old  writing;  in 
all  of  these  par- 
ticulars  it   dis- 

*-•       4.1  J'&        j          FlG-    89— Vertical  Writing.      Published   1893-7. 

tinctly        dlttered,  Used  in  American  schools  about  ten  years. 

not  only  from  the 

old  round  hand,  but  also  from  the  immediately  preced- 
ing style  which  it  displaced  and  which  in  the  main  was 
simply  a  modified  round  hand. 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  181 

Out  of  the  late  Spencerian  and  P.  D.  &  S.  styles  there 
has  since  been  developed,  from  approximately  about 
1880,  the  modern  commercial  hand  (Figs.  87,  88), 
which  has  certain  distinctive  characteristics.  This  style 
of  writing  was  perfected  and  popularized  through  the 
excellent  work  of  the  American  commercial  schools  that 
for  years  have  given  special  emphasis  to  rapid  business 
writing.  An  essential  element  of  this  writing  has  been 
a  free  movement,  in  which  the  arm  is  brought  into  use 
in  the  writing  process,  and  the  forms  adopted  have  been 
those  best  suited  to  easy,  rapid  writing. 

Another  and  the  last  great  revolution  in  American 
handwriting  began  in  the  last  decade  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  and  was  the  adoption  of  vertical  writing  (Fig. 
89)  by  the  American  schools.  This  revolution  is  in  fact 
a  reversion  to  the  old  systems  of  slow  but  legible  writ- 
ing. The  new  writing  with  its  round,  drawn  letters  is 
a  kind  of  printing,  as  the  old  writing  had  been,  and  has 
been  taught  with  almost  no  attention  to  movement  and 
speed. 

This  last  revolution,  the  adoption  of  vertical  writing, 
is  even  more  radical  than  the  first  because  it  affects 
form,  movement  and  position,  and  has  brought  about  a 
change  in  American  handwriting  which  will  be  apparent 
for  many  years  no  matter  what  influences  or  changes 
may  occur  in  the  immediate  future.  The  old  round  hand 
writing1  went  out  with  the  old  stage  coach,  and  for  the 

lrrhe  modified  round  hand  style  among  other  things  differs  from 
the  old  round  hand  in  proportions  of  small  letters  and  numerous 
capital  letter  designs.  This  modified  hand  as  written  by  many  made 
the  small  loop  letters  four  times  as  high  as  the  short  letters  and  the 
flourished  oval  finish  of  capitals  N,  H,  R,  K,  L,  U  and  X  (see  illustra- 
tions) was  a  pronounced  characteristic  of  this  writing.  The  capitals  T 
and  F  were  also  very  different  from  the  regular  round  hand  and  were 
made  with  a  peculiar  top  with  an  acute  angle  out  at  the  right. 


182 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.   90 — Examples   of  four   different   systems   of 

writing  ;     Round     Hand,    Angular,    Vertical, 

Modern  Spencerian.     These  specimens  all 

taken  from  recent  business  letters. 


same  reason, 
and  the  strange 
but  brief  revival 
of  its  leading 
characteristics  in 
the  American 
schools  in  the 
new  vertical 
writing  will  be 
looked  back  up- 
on as  one  of  the 
most  curious  in- 
cidents in  the 
history  of  edu- 
cation. 

Early  writing 

was  not  what  we  call  script,  but  what  we  now  describe  as 
pen  printing,  and  the  distinguishing  difference  between 
pen  writing  and  pen  printing,  that  is,  the  connecting  of 
the  characters  as  they  are  made,  was  not  developed  till 
rather  late  in  the  history  of  writing.  As  writing  came  in- 
to more  common  use  its  speed  was  increased,  and  the  re- 
sult of  this  in  all  languages  was  the  tendency  to  slant  let- 
ters in  the  direction  of  the  writing  and  connect  them  with 
each  other,  which  necessarily  somewhat  decreased  the 
legibility,  but  made  the  writing  more  rapid  and  practical. 

As  we  have  already  seen  a  very  large  proportion  of 
all  writing  points  unmistakably  to  the  style  on  which 
it  was  based  (Figs.  90,  92)  and  the  time  when  it  was 
written.  What  is  left  of  the  early  style  may  be  a  mere 
trace  of  the  original  characteristics,  but  may  yet  be  of 
the  utmost  significance  in  a  writing  inquiry,  and,  if  not 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  183 

understood  by  a  forger,  may  be  omitted  entirely  or  in- 
correctly reproduced,  especially  if  the  attempt  is  made 
to  imitate  a  writing  of  a  different  system,  class,  or 
nationality  from  that  of  the  writer.  An  accidental 
divergence  in  the  writing  imitated  may  be  ridiculously 
exaggerated  and  repeated  again  and  again  in  an  imita- 
tion, and  fixed  system  characteristics  may  be  entirely 
omitted. 

It  is  comparatively  easy  to  procure  examples  of  a 
system  of  writing  or  of  any  foreign  writing  the  charac- 
teristics of  which  may  enter  into  an  inquiry,  and  such 
specimens  should,  if  possible,  always  be  obtained.  It  is, 
of  course,  not  feasible  to  illustrate  in  this  chapter  the 
characteristics  of  all  the  varying  systems,  but  illustra- 
tions of  a  few  are  shown. 

There  are  occasionally  found  what  may  properly  be 
described  as  original  hands,  which  may  be  almost  en- 
tirely unconventional,  but  in  most  cases  they  are  but 
partly  original  and  often  are  a  combination  of  two  other 
styles.  Some  apparently  original  hands  are  peculiar  in 
but  one  way  which,  however,  gives  them  a  singular  and 
striking  appearance.  A  hand  showing  a  few  marked 
peculiarities  is,  as  a  rule,  imitated  more  easily  than  an 
ordinary  hand.  An  imitation  of  a  fantastic  and  peculiar 
signature  at  once  appears  genuine  if  one  or  two  of  its 
leading  and  most  striking  features  are  reproduced. 

It  is  rare  indeed  that  any  handwriting  is  a  slavish 
reproduction  of  a  system  and  almost  certainly  it  will 
diverge  in  a  great  many  ways.  It  is  so  improbable  that 
the  directions  and  extent  of  these  divergences  will  be  ex- 
actly duplicated  in  two  individuals  that  such  a  coinci- 
dence becomes  practically  impossible,  and  this  multitude 


184 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


of  possible  varia- 
tions when  com- 
bined is  what  con- 
stitutes individual- 
ity in  handwriting. 
There  are  certain 
types  of  writing  de- 
veloped in  various 
occupations  that 
have  well  known 
characteristics.  One 
of  these  hands  is 
that  used  by  the 
telegraph  operator, 
already  shown  in 
the  chapter  on  ar- 
rangement of  writ- 
ing. This  distinc- 
tive style  is  largely 
the  result  of  condi- 
tions, but  it  is  no 

FIG.  91 — The  Angular  Hand.  Taught  in  America  1-1.1  ,  i 
mainly  in  Ladies' Seminaries.  Popularized  OOUDt     alSO     partly 
among  women  in  England  and  Canada  J.K        ^^U     nf     prm_ 
by   having   been   written   beauti- 
fully by  their  much  loved  sov-  scious     and     uncon- 
ereign,    Queen  Victoria. 

scious    imitation. 

The  manipulation  of  the  telegraphers'  key  develops  a 
certain  muscular  action  and  skill  which,  no  doubt,  af- 
fects the  writing  process,  and  the  necessity  for  con- 
tinuity, speed  and  legibility,  and  the  natural  desire  to 
copy  the  style  of  those  already  expert  all  lead  to  the 
result  shown.  The  literary  hand,  the  railroad  style  and 
the  writing  of  the  business  clerk  or  bookkeeper  each  have 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


185 


certain  well  defined  characteristics  which 
are  partly  developed  by  the  conditions 
and  in  a  measure  are  also  the  result  of 
imitation. 

The  distinctive  and  often  large  and 
awkward  angular  hand  (Fig.  91)  taught 
in  certain  schools  and  seminaries  for 
women,  is  one  of  the  most  certain  and 
fixed  sex  indications  in  writing.  The 
presence  of  such  system  features  is  very 
significant  in  some  anonymous  letter 
cases  in  relieving  from  suspicion  men 
who  may  have  been  suspected  or  ac- 
cused. System,  class  and  nationality 
characteristics  are  especially  important 
in  identifying  anonymous  letter  writers 
or  in  any  inquiry  in  which  a  consider- 
able quantity  of  writing  is  under  in- 
vestigation. 

It  is  easy  to  understand  how  the  writ- 
er of  any  distinctive  system  has  diffi- 
culty in  laying  aside  his  own  style  and 
taking  up  another  when  he  does  not 
understand  just  how  the  systems  differ.    FIG.  92 
A  few  of  the  many  ways  in  which  sys- 
tem features  of  the  Spencerian  and  old 
round  hand  enter  into  the  identification  of  writing  are 
here  briefly  outlined.    They  are  numbered  so  that  ready 
reference  can  be  made  to  the  accompanying  illustration, 
Fig.  93. 

In  a  recent  case   (1)  two  capital  "E's"  appeared  in 
a  disputed  document,  each  made  with  a  loop  in  the 


Old  style 
writing,   1820 
to  1850. 


186 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  93 — Comparisons  of  old 

Round  Hand  and  Spen- 

cerian  characteristics. 

not    have    been    the 
his  liberty. 


center.  Among  scores  of  stand- 
ard "E's"  in  the  case  made  by 
an  aged  writer  of  the  round  hand 
system  not  one  had  a  loop. 
Many  old  round  hand  models 
made  this  letter  without  a  loop 
while  the  later  systems  all  make 
the  "E's"  with  a  loop  between 
the  upper  and  lower  parts.  The 
presence  of  these  two  little  loops 
thus  became  of  very  great  sig- 
nificance. 

In  another  case  it  was  claimed 
that  a  certain  writing,  not  dis- 
guised in  any  way,  identified  a 
man  suspected  of  a  murder  on 
other  evidence.  Among  some 
other  foreign  characteristics  the 
writing  contained  several  "M's" 
and  "AY'  made  from  the  bot- 
tom and  continuous  ( 2 )  as  in  the 
old  round  hand  and  in  some  for- 
eign hands.  The  suspected  writ- 
er, a  young  American,  among 
other  divergences  made  the  same 
forms  of  letters  but  always  in 
just  the  opposite  direction  as 
they  are  taught  in  the  Spen- 
cerian  system  which  he  learned. 
The  suspected  man  clearly  could 
writer  and  was  at  once  given 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


187 


Many  old  round 
hand  writers  make 
(3)  the  small  h, 
k,  1  and  b  without 
a  loop  in  the  top 
but  do  put  a  loop 
in  the  f  as  several 
of  the  systems 
taught.  An  imita- 
tion of  this  writ- 
ing made  loops  in 
all  the  long  letters 
as  the  later  sys- 
tem teaches. 

Other  old  round 
hand  writers  al- 
ways raise  the  pen 


FIG.  94— Figures  of  1783-7,  1821,  1848,  1864-88. 


before  (4)  small  a 
and  d  and  g  as  the  system  taught,  and  in  an  imitation 
of  this  writing,  composed  of  several  lines,  more  than  a 
dozen  of  these  letters  were  made  continuously,  follow- 
ing the  style  of  the  later  systems. 

Another  difficulty  that  imitators  of  this  old  style  find 
is  in  (5)  the  capital  B  and  R  made  without  the  loop  in 
the  middle  of  the  letter  and  with  the  angle  at  the  con- 
nection inclined  upward.  The  later  systems  made  a 
loop  and  inclined  it  downward  to  the  right. 

The  old  figures,  particularly  the  4,  6  and  9,  have 
helped  to  prove  many  forgeries.  The  figure  4  was  made 
with  a  sharp  top  or  with  the  strokes  distinctly  inclined 
toward  each  other  and  the  first  part  higher  than  the  last, 
very  different  from  the  modern  character.  Many  writ- 


188  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ers  of  the  old  system  made  the  six  from  the  bottom  up- 
wards, in  just  the  opposite  direction  from  that  in  which 
the  later  form  was  made,  and  the  six  and  nine  were  both 
made  with  a  distinctly  curved  staff  instead  of  straight 
as  in  modern  characters.  These  figures  and  the  modern 
forms  are  shown  in  Fig.  94. 

The  lower  loop  letters  (7)  g,  j,  y  show  in  the  typical 
old  round  hand  a  peculiar  and  decided  shading  begin- 
ning at  the  top  but  not  continued  to  the  base  and  the 
lower  part  of  the  letter  is  thrown  slightly  back  toward 
the  left.  This  form  is  also  found  in  the  capitals  J  and 
Y  when  made  below  the  line.  Writers  of  the  later  style, 
in  which  these  strokes  are  straight  and  not  shaded,  find  it 
very  difficult  (see  Fig.  107)  to  get  this  old  round  hand 
eff ect  in  these  letters. 

The  decided  retracing  of  the  sharp  angles,  as  at  the 
bottom  of  (8)  the  small  m  and  many  similar  letters,  has 
been  a  serious  stumbling  block  to  writers  of  fraudulent 
documents  and  the  continuous  uniform  shading  has 
caused  many  a  forger's  downfall. 

The  small  letter  w  in  many  of  the  old  round  hand 
alphabets  (9)  is  so  divergent  from  the  modern  form 
(Fig.  80)  that  an  imitator  to  whom  it  is  unknown, 
especially  in  making  a  whole  document,  will  often  fail 
to  make  it  correctly.  In  the  old  writing  (10)  the  small 
o,  a,  g,  d,  q  at  the  beginning  of  words,  were  made  with 
no  upward  introductory  stroke;  the  later  systems  put  a 
stroke  on  all  these  letters.  The  presence  of  these  little 
strokes  in  an  imitation  of  this  old  writing  thus  may  be 
a  matter  of  very  great  importance.  The  (11)  small  o 
and  s  in  the  old  writing  at  the  end  of  words  in  sentences 
usually  omitted  the  short  finishing  stroke  and  all  the  late 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  189 

systems,  up  to  but  not  including  modern  vertical,  made 
it;  thus  a  few  small  o's  and  s's  with  these  little  strokes 
may  be  very  damaging  to  a  disputed  document. 

Some  influence  in  America  during  the  latter  part  of 
the  eighteenth  and  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
centuries,  established  the  fashion  that  no  capital  letter 
should  go  below  the  line  of  writing,  as  shown  in  Fig.  80. 
This  did  not  affect  the  legibility  of  the  G,  Y  and  Z,  but 
did  make  it  impossible  to  distinguish  I  and  J1.  Early 
English  writing  used  the  I  and  J  form  interchangeably, 
either  form  being  used  for  I  (Figs.  80,  97)  ;  many 
English  alphabets  in  the  eighteenth  century  show  both 
forms  ( Fig.  79 ) ,  but  for  many  years  in  America  John 
and  James,  and  all  similar  proper  names,  were  usually 


*In  this  alphabet,  the  letter  J  has  been  restored  to  its  long  required 
situation  and  value.  It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  it  has  been  ejected 
from  the  good  society  of  its  former  associates,  by  teachers  of  the  past 
and  present  generations  of  men,  who  have  instructed  their  pupils,  that 
lohn  is  the  correct  way  for  writing  John,  loshua  for  Joshua,  etc.;  and 
so  extensive  has  been  the  effect  of  it,  that  but  few  penmen  at  the  pres- 
ent day  know  how  to  form  a  J,  for  any  particular  required  purpose. 
This  has  continued  to  be  the  case  throughout  one  generation  at 
least  of  mankind.  The  ruthless  hand  of  fashion  has  rejected  the  use- 
ful J,  because  it  passes  below  the  line  on  which  the  other  capital  letters 
are  written;  but  the  errors,  losses,  and  mistakes,  which  have  been 
engendered  by  that  violation  on  the  alphabet,  in  many  other  important 
instances  than  those  here  enumerated,  sufficient  to  amount  to  a  little 
fortune  monthly,  if  it  could  be  registered  throughout  Christendom, 
has  become  of  sufficient  consequence  in  the  business  concerns  of  every 
one,  to  restore  the  J  to  its  legitimately  assigned  and  useful  place  in 
the  alphabet. — American  Text  Book  for  Letters.  Nath'l  Dearborn, 
Boston,  1846. 

You  will  recollect  that  on  a  preceding  page  of  this  book  the  capital 
J,  in  the  word  Judge,  was  placed  on  the  line  with  the  small  and  short 
letters;  but  in  the  word  Jeffersonite,  on  the  same  page,  it  was  car- 
ried below  the  line  as  far  as  the  bottom  of  the  g,  y,  etc.,  would  extend, 
in  the  same  sized  writing.  The  author  decidedly  prefers  the  last 
method.  The  two  forms  are  again  exhibited  on  this  page. 

Were  all  persons  to  make  this  distinction  between  the  I  and  J, 
there  could  be  no  mistaking  the  letter  designed  by  the  writer,  as  is 
now  often  done,  and  will  be  so  long  as  only  minor  differences  exist 
between  them.  This  makes  it  a  universal  rule  to  carry  the  J  below 
the  line. — Badlam's  System  of  Writing,  by  C.  G.  Badlam,  New 
York  (1850). 


190  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

written  with  a  capital  I.  This  old  fashion  has  often  been 
misunderstood  and  misinterpreted  by  the  forger. 

Many  of  the  old  round  hand  system  forms  can  still 
be  seen  in  sign  painter's  and  engraver's  script.  The 
streets  of  almost  any  city  show  many  examples  of  the 
style  of  writing  that  formerly  was  written  with  pen  and 
pencil.  Every  capital  letter  and  every  small  letter  in 
the  old  writing  is  very  different  from  the  later  writing 
that  displaced  it,  and  pitfalls  are  on  every  side  of  the 
inexperienced  forger  who  attempts  to  write,  especially 
with  freedom,  that  which  he  really  does  not  see  and 
often  cannot  understand. 

It  should  not  be  understood  that  it  is  possible  to  look 
at  every  piece  of  writing,  however  small,  and  tell  the 
system  on  which  it  is  based  or  the  age  of  the  writer,  but 
it  can  easily  be  understood  what  an  important  bearing 
the  date  value  of  written  forms  may  have,  particularly 
in  examining  a  long  disputed  document.  These  almost 
hidden  characteristics  may  be  of  great  force  as  proof 
of  genuineness  or,  if  misunderstood  and  misinterpreted, 
may  be  almost  conclusive  proof  of  forgery.  Neither 
should  it  be  inferred  that  comparison  of  a  disputed 
document  is  to  be  made  only  with  the  model  writing  of 
a  system,  but  if  such  suspected  wTriting  diverges  from 
the  genuine  standard  writing  in  the  case  in  the  manner 
in  which  two  systems  differ  from  each  other,  then  the 
reason  for  the  divergence  is  explained  and  its  force  as 
evidence  is  greatly  increased. 

The  shape  of  the  beginning  ovals  of  the  group  of 
capital  letters  of  the  U,  V  and  W  class  has  a  definite 
date  value.  The  old  round  hand  shows  a  beginning  loop 
or  oval  of  two  strokes  in  which  the  lines  do  not  cross; 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  191 

(Figs.  80,  82,  84)  the  later  modified  round  hand  shows  a 
complete  double  oval  (Fig.  83)  beginning  with  an  up- 
ward stroke;  the  later  Spencerian  and  P.  D.  &  S.  sys- 
tems begin  this  part  at  the  base  line  (Figs.  85,  86)  and 
make  no  loop  or  oval  at  the  top,  while  the  later  Ameri- 
can commercial  hand  goes  back  to  the  old  round  hand 
form  except  that  the  strokes  cross  at  the  top  of  the  let- 
ters (Figs.  87,  88),  and  the  modern  vertical  makes  no 
loop  whatever  ( Fig.  89 ).  A  study  of  these  forms  will 
show  clearly  the  steps  described. 

The  modern  form  of  the  capital  J  with  the  round  top 
did  not  come  into  common  use  till  about  1873.  Before 
that  time  the  model  letter  in  the  copy-books  was  pointed 
at  the  top  and  often  was  made  with  an  ova]  at  the  center 
as  in  Fig.  82.  Many  old  round  hand  writers  made  the 
letter  with  two  separate  downward  strokes  beginning 
at  the  same  point  as  is  clearly  shown  by  the  shading  on 
both  strokes.  All  late  systems  of  writing  make  the  J 
with  a  round  top.  Reference  to  footnote1  with  valuable 


Principally  through  the  efforts  of  O.  H.  Bowler  the  old  form  of 
the  seven  capitals  of  the  V,  U,  and  Y  class  were  changed  to  the  simple 
reversed  oval  made  from  the  base  of  the  letter.  These  letters  first 
appeared  in  copy  books  in  one  book,  the  "No.  12"  of  the  P.  D.  &  S. 
series,  in  1867,  and  they  were  put  into  the  regular  numbers  of  the 
Spencerian  books  in  1873.  They  had  already  all  appeared  in  the 
Eclectic  system  in  1870.  They  were  not  put  in  as  regular  standards 
in  the  P.  D.  &  S.  books  until  1881. 

The  modern  capitals  C  and  D  of  the  type  of  the  Roman  printed 
letters,  were  put  into  the  regular  Spencerian  books  in  1873;  the  same 
letters  had  already  appeared  in  one  number  of  the  P.  D.  &  S.  series 
but  were  not  both  included  in  their  regular  series  till  some  years 
later.  Their  general  use,  however,  may  be  said  to  begin  about  1873. 

The  pointed  top  I  and  J  seem  to  have  been  changed  to  the  round 
top  form  principally  through  the  influence  of  Professor  Hurlburt,  of 
Lockport,  N.  Y.,  who  in  his  "Boston  Long  Wharf"  penmanship  pub- 
lished and  popularized  this  form  but  he  did  not  publish  copy  books. 
These  letters  first  appeared  in  copy  books  as  regular  standards  in  the 
Spencerian  series  in  1873.  They  were  adopted  as  standard  letters  in 
the  P.  D.  &  S.  books  in  1876. — By  Mr.  George  H.  Shattuck,  of  Medina, 
N.  Y.,  one  of  the  "Spencerian"  authors. 


192  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

information  regarding  the  adoption  of  numerous  let- 
ters forms  will  show  that  capitals  C  and  D  also  have  an 
interesting  copy  book  history. 

It  is  plain  to  see  that  system  characteristics  may  enter, 
not  simply  into  questions  as  described  above,  but  into 
any  inquiry  in  which  a  writer  attempts  to  imitate  writ- 
ing of  a  system  differing  from  his  own.  Questions  in- 
volving angular  writing  often  arise  and  the  new  verti- 
cal writing,  although  now  only  a  few  years  of  age,  is 
already  entering  into  questioned  document  inquiries. 

The  facts  regarding  the  dates  and  features  of  systems 
of  writing  have  a  particularly  important  bearing  upon 
the  question  of  the  authenticity  of  ancient  documents 
of  any  kind.  Many  questions  have  arisen  involving  the 
history  of  the  development  of  English  handwriting1 
and  audacious  forgeries  purporting  to  be  hundreds  of 
years  of  age  have  been  produced  ranging  in  importance 
from  alleged  letters  of  the  immortal  Shakespeare  to 
writing  of  kings  and  queens.  Hundreds  of  thousands 
of  dollars  have  been  paid  for  forged  writing  of  noted 
persons.  The  most  ridiculous  credulity  is  shown  by 
those  who  on  other  subjects  seem  sane  and  sensible.  No 
one  should  buy  an  autograph  except  from  a  reputable 


1Upon  the  invention  of  printing-  in  Germany,  the  letters  made  use 
of  were  naturally  these  old  Gothic  or  German,  but  when  the  new  art 
passed  into  Italy  the  Roman  characters  were  substituted,  and  soon 
proved  their  greater  suitability  through  their  greater  simplicity.  That 
our  modern  round  hand  is  merely  an  adaptation  from  the  Roman 
letters  no  one  can  well  doubt,  they  being  at  the  same  time  made  more 
freely  running.  One  might  have  been  inclined  to  believe  that  the 
MS.  modern  hand  had  been  directly  taken  from  the  printed  forms,  al- 
though it  is  now  understood  that  the  earliest  printing  was  in  imitation 
of  MS.,  the  sheet  being  placed  upon  the  block  and  afterwards  engraved; 
and  the  block  impression  having  been  ironed  out  of  the  "back  of  the 
sheet,  two  of  these  were  pasted  together  so  as  exactly  to  resemble  and 
pass  for  MS. — "According  to  Cocker,"  by  W.  Anderson  Smith, 
London,  1887. 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING 


193 


FIG.  95 — Old  English  Gothic  hand  showing  Roman  notation,  "XHIIth  day  of 

August"    and   "XVIIIth   yere  of  Kyng  Edward  the  thred"  (1347). 

From  The  Origin  and  Progress  of  Writing,  by  Thomas  Astle, 

Keeper  of  the  Records  in  the  Tower  of  London  (1784). 


FIG.  96 — The  Shakespeare  hand,  English  Gothic,  from  a  school  book,  published 
in  London  in  1581,  now  in  the  Library  of  Congress,  Washington,  D.  C. 


FIG.  97 — Seventeenth  century  English  writing.     The  change  from  the  old 

Gothic  script  was  made  during  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  and  the 

beginning  of  the  seventeenth  centuries. 


194  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

dealer  who  can  furnish  an  authenticated  history  of  the 
document1. 

The  study  of  palaeography2  was  at  one  time  a  very 
live  subject  in  Europe  and  now  and  then  some  question 
still  arises  regarding  some  ancient  charter  or  deed.  Al- 
though these  questions  may  be  of  the  utmost  importance 
they  are  not  sufficiently  frequent  at  this  day  to  warrant 

JWhat  was  ever  more  absurd  than  the  readiness  with  which  the 
public  accepted  the  fabrications  of  young  Ireland?  What  could  pos- 
sibly be  more  ridiculous  than  the  sight  of  dear,  clever,  old  Boswell 
reverently  kissing,  on  his  bended  knees,  the  pseudo-Shakespeare  writ- 
ings which  the  young  clerk  had  just  manufactured,  while  he  ecstatical- 
ly uttered  the  Nunc  Dimittis!  No  forgery  was  ever  more  clumsily 
done.  The  writing  not  only  bore  no  resemblance  to  Shakespeare's, 
but  was  unlike  any  style  of  writing  whatever,  and  would  never  have 
deceived  anyone  who  had  calmly  examined  it.  But  who  could  ex- 
ercise cool  judgment  whilst  gazing  at  what  he  believed  to  be  the  newly 
discovered  autographs  of  Shakespeare?  The  very  name  of  Shakes- 
peare is  a  spell  to  cast  glamour  over  the  senses  of  Englishmen,  and 
to  get  any  further  particulars  concerning  that  genius,  of  whom  we 
know  so  little,  what  would  not  be  sacrificed?  The  very  thought  of 
seeing  those  lines,  traced  by  Shakespeare's  hand,  would  make  the 
hearts  of  enthusiasts  palpitate,  and  their  brains  reel  with  rapture; 
and  thus  men  lost  their  reason,  were  incapable  of  reflection,  and  ac- 
cepted whatever  Ireland  offered  them.  Old  Boswell's  extravagant 
action  was  only  the  outward  and  visible  display  of  what  many  felt. 
It  was  in  vain  that  a  few  persons  of  sober  judgment  pointed  out,  by 
the  clearest  evidence,  that  the  writing  could  not  possibly  be  Shakes- 
peare's, for  such  heresy  was  not  listened  to  with  patience  by  those 
who  were  eager  to  believe. 

Who,  for  instance,  could  be  induced  to  believe  that  any  human 
being  in  his  senses  would  spend  a  fortune  in  purchasing  autograph 
letters  of  Julius  Caesar,  Alexander  the  Great,  Judas  Iscariot,  Mary 
Magdalene,  etc.,  written  in  modern  French,  on  paper  bearing  the  fleur- 
de-lys  water  mark,  which  showed  it  had  been  recently  manufactured  at 
Angouleme?  What  then  must  be  thought  when  we  find  an  autograph 
collector  of  thirty  years'  experience,  who,  moreover,  was  a  member  of 
the  French  Academy,  and  bore  a  European  reputation  as  a  profound 
mathematician,  doing  this?  After  such  a  fact  need  one  be  astonished 
at  anything? — Historical  Documents,  etc.,  by  Scott  &  Davey,  London, 
1891.,  pp.  91,  92. 

-"For  some  time  after  the  invention  of  printing,  as  both  com- 
positor and  scholar  were  familiar  with  the  mediaeval  script,  no  need 
of  palaeographic  study  was  felt;  but,  as  the  old  contractions  disap- 
peared from  printed  books  and  the  new  Italian  hand  crowded  out  the 
crabbed  monastic  writing,  the  manuscripts  grew  unintelligible.  At 
the  same  time  the  exposure  of  such  forgeries  as  the  Constantinian 
Donation  and  the  Pseudo-Isidorian  decretals  threw  doubt  on  the  genu- 
ineness of  all  ancient  documents.  In  their  eagerness  to  save  the  true  at 
the  cost  of  the  false,  Catholic  scholars  went  almost  further  than 


SYSTEMS  OF  WRITING  195 

exhaustive  discussion  in  this  work  and  space  is  taken  for 
only  a  few  footnote  references  to  the  subject  and  a  few 
illustrations.  Dr.  Scott  and  Samuel  Davey,  in  their 
interesting  book,  "Historical  Documents,  Literary 
Manuscripts,  Autograph  Letters,  etc.,"  give  much  valu- 
able information  regarding  the  investigation  of  ancient 


KXI  XY  •"*  •  1  1  1  *p'-vv  t  >  f  *  »  *  o  *  i*i*i*"r-M 
KJO»  i  i  i-         M  *r  *>«ooi<o  v<T>Apc^ 

MfOY'l'O'roOYi  ••V|>1  MVrOVTi  «*«M 
Xr^i  i  o  K/icrr*p  t  uJo  r  Joocri'tif  V 
R\O  «  VO  I  Xr-iOOYK-V'CI  I  VI  I  pi  i>t.'<:r  • 


yl  v  X  I  Cl  Y  P  *-  (>  '  '  "V  C'~  f  **"  f  O  VO  V   i  K  x  f><>c 
JM  ri  i»l  i  rxi  I  11^  XOI\CU  VCO  YKX1 
t  I  Kill  \C>»C!  IvVll  1C  f  fC.V  11^ 


FIG.  98— Uncial  Greek  of  the  Fifth  Century  A.  D.  from  the  Codex  Alexan- 

drinus.     (Daniel  V.  25,  26,  27,  28.)    Reproduced  from  a  photographic 

copy  of  the  original   manuscript  in  the  British  Museum. 

documents  of  all  kinds.  A  valuable  illustrated  article 
on  the  general  subject  of  palaeography  is  printed  in  the 
Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  and  Mabillon's  great  work, 
referred  to  in  the  footnote,  can  be  seen  in  the  leading 
libraries.  The  many  photographic  reproductions  of 
ancient  documents  now  available  are  a  great  aid  to 
thorough  study  of  the  subject. 

Protestants  in  their  skepticism,  and  in  1675  the  learned  Jesuit  Pape- 
broch,  editor  of  the  Bollandist  Acta  Sanctorum,  made  a  sweeping 
assault  on  all  charters  claiming-  early  Prankish  origin.  These  charters 
were  almost  wholly  in  the  hands  of  the  one  ancient  monastic  order  of 
the  West,  the  Benedictines,  and  the  ablest  of  its  scholars,  Mabillon, 
came  to  the  rescue  of  the  questioned  documents  by  the  publication  in 
1681  of  his  De  re  diplomatica.  It  created  at  one  stroke  a  new  science. 
With  the  sure  hand  of  a  master  he  laid  down  the  criteria  and  rules  for 
the  determination  of  the  age  of  MSS.,  illustrating  and  proving  from  the 
ample  materials  at  his  hand.  Even  his  Jesuit  opponent  was  convinced, 
and  Mabillon's  book  remains  the  foremost  in  the  literature  of  its  sub- 
ject."— Prof.  G.  L.  Burr,  of  Cornell  University,  in  Universal  Cyclopaedia, 
under  "Palaeography." 


CHAPTER  XII. 

VARIATION   IN   GENUINE  WRITING 

Arguments  are  sometimes  made  in  good  faith  to  the 
effect  that  because  handwriting  varies  therefore  it  does 
not  afford  a  reliable  basis  for  any  opinion  whatever  as 
to  its  identity.  Unfortunately  there  are  those  whose  in- 
terests strongly  impel  them  to  make  this  claim  and  in 
certain  cases  of  wide  interest  much  misinformation  on 
the  subject  has  been  supplied  to  the  public  by  those  ar- 
rayed against  the  facts.  It  is  true  that  genuine  writing 
by  the  same  writer  does  vary,  and  in  an  examination  of 
questioned  writing  this  phase  of  the  subject  should  re- 
ceive careful  attention.  The  arm,  hand  and  fingers 
under  the  direction  of  the  brain  do  not  constitute  an 
absolutely  accurate  reproducing  machine,  like  an  en- 
graved plate  or  a  printing  press,  and  certain  natural 
divergencies  are  inevitable.  If  such  divergencies  were 
fundamental  and  applied  to  the  whole  process  of  writ- 
ing then  the  identification  of  a  handwriting  would  be 
an  impossibility  and  forgery  would  be  a  very  simple 
process. 

Writing  varies  as  speech  varies;  it  may  be  large  or 
small  as  speech  is  low  or  loud ;  it  may  be  careful  or  care- 
less, like  speech,  but  both  methods  of  human  expression 
finally  come  to  be  habits  of  the  individual  acquired  by 
thousands  of  repetitions  of  the  same  act.  As  well  might 
one  think  that  on  one  occasion  a  man  would  speak  Eng- 
lish with  a  strong  German  flavor  and  at  another  time 

[196] 


VARIATION   IN  GENUINE  WRITING  197 

drop  accidentally  into  an  Irish  accent,  as  to  think,  for 
example,  that  a  writer  would  to-day  write  the  modern 
vertical  hand  of  the  school  boy  or  the  old  round-hand  of 
Revolutionary  days,  and  to-morrow,  without  intention 
or  premeditation,  write  the  distinctive  angular  hand 
written  by  many  women.  His  writing,  like  his  speech, 
is  part  of  his  very  flesh  and  bones. 

It  is  true  that  speech  and  writing  may  both  be  dis- 
guised and  unnatural,  and  may  imitate  a  style  very  dif- 
ferent from  that  usually  followed,  but  average  uncon- 
scious writing  varies  no  more  than  average  unconscious 
speech,  since  both  finally  are  simply  unconscious  habits. 
If  speech  with  all  its  quirks  and  mannerisms  were  actu- 
ally visible  how  positively  it  would  identify  an  individ- 
ual! Writing  is  practically  visible  speech,  or  the  "talk- 
ing paper,"  as  the  Indian  says,  and,  by  all  its  thousands 
of  peculiarities  in  combination,  is  the  most  personal  and 
individual  thing  that  a  man  does  which  leaves  a  record 
that  can  be  seen  and  studied. 

The  variation  of  any  particular  handwriting  is  a  mat- 
ter, however,  that  must  always  be  taken  into  account 
and  given  proper  consideration.  The  characteristics  of 
a  handwriting  are  of  various  degrees  of  force  and  value 
as  affecting  judgment  in  regard  to  identity  or  differ- 
ence of  two  writings,  depending  upon  their  character 
and  permanency.  As  was  outlined  in  the  chapter  on 
standards  of  comparison,  the  characteristics  or  features 
and  elements  of  a  particular  writing  as  carefully  an- 
alyzed and  classified  are:  (1)  permanent  or  invariable, 
(2)  habitual  or  usual,  (3)  occasional,  and  (4)  excep- 
tional or  rare.  Characteristics  in  one  handwriting  may 
have  special  significance  which  in  another  may  have  but 


198  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

little  force,  all  depending  upon  the  writing  habits  of  the 
one  whose  writing  is  under  examination,  and  the  facts 
in  each  case  must  be  made  to  apply  only  to  that  case. 
It  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  genuine  sig- 
natures written  by  the  same  writer  differ  from  each 
other  within  certain  well  defined  limits,  and  certain  nor- 
mal divergencies  in  size,  lateral  position  and  propor- 
tions actually  indicate  genuineness.  This  fact  is  shown 
in  an  examination  of  traced  forgeries  which  may  be 
too  nearly  like  each  other  or  too  nearly  like  a  common 
model  to  be  genuine. 

Variations  in  genuine  writing  are  ordinarily  in  super- 
ficial parts,  and  in  size,  proportions  and  the  degree 
of  care  given  to  the  act.  Writing  as  a  whole  process 
is  very  much  more  fixed  than  it  is  generally  thought  to 
be,  and,  as  stated,  is  in  fact  one  of  the  most  permanent 
and  unconscious  of  human  habits.  This  is  clearly  shown 
in  any  collection  of  genuine  writings  produced  at  dif- 
ferent times,  with  different  pens  or  pencils  and  under 
a  great  variety  of  conditions,  but  which  when  brought 
together  and  carefully  examined  show  running  through 
them  a  marked,  unmistakable  uniformity  and  individu- 
ality. When  one  says  his  writing  is  never  twice  alike, 
meaning  that  its  primary  characteristics  differ,  it  is  clear 
that  such  a  penman  is  not  qualified  to  speak  with  author- 
ity on  the  subject,  and  it  is  found,  in  almost  every  case, 
that  he  refers  only  to  certain  superficial  form  character- 
istics. Divergencies  are  of  different  degrees  with  dif- 
ferent writers,  but  are  seldom  so  pronounced  as  it  is 
thought  by  many  that  they  are.  The  signature  of  the 
halting,  careless,  changeable,  unskillful  writer  is  of 
course  forged  with  less  difficulty  than  that  of  the  more 


VARIATION   IN   GENUINE  WRITING  199 

skillful  and  uniform  writer,  and  it  is  entirely  possible 
that  a  skillful  forgery  could  not  be  picked  out  from  a 
mixed  collection  of  signatures  by  such  a  writer.  Each 
case,  as  suggested,  must  be  acted  upon  and  decided  by 
itself,  and  circumstances  are  sometimes  of  a  character 
that  make  it  impossible  for  the  most  competent  examiner 
to  reach  a  positive  conclusion. 

Writing  is  sometimes  questioned  that  it  is  alleged  was 
written  with  the  writer  lying  in  bed  seriously  ill,  or  writ- 
ten soon  after  the  writer  had  suffered  from  apoplexy, 
and  it  is  easy  to  understand  that  such  writing  may  be 
so  broken,  distorted  and  unusual  that  no  one  can  speak 
confidently  as  to  its  genuineness  by  comparison  with 
standard  writing  produced  under  normal  conditions  of 
health.  Writing  is  sometimes  disputed  that  was  written 
while  standing  and  in  a  book  held  in  the  hand,  and  ques- 
tions have  arisen  regarding  writing  produced  on  a  rail- 
road train  while  in  motion.  The  main  difficulty  about  a 
comparison  of  writings  under  these  conditions  is  that 
there  are  no  available  standards  written  under  similar 
conditions  and  the  difficulty  of  the  problem  is  to  reach 
a  conclusion  with  no  standard  writing.  In  some  inquiries 
sixty  years  separate  a  questioned  and  a  standard  writing, 
making  it  difficult  to  give  any  opinion  whatever. 

The  examiner  who  claims  to  be  able  to  determine  with 
certainty  whether  a  writing  is  genuine  or  spurious,  no 
matter  how  unfavorable  the  conditions  imposed  upon 
the  examiner,  assumes  to  do  that  which  cannot  always 
be  done.  There  are  cases  involving  questioned  hand- 
writing the  merits  of  which  must  be  determined  from 
circumstances  outside  of  the  writing  itself.  Such  cases, 
however,  are  usually  those  in  which  only  a  verv  small 


200  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

quantity  of  writing  is  in  question  or  in  which  the  stand- 
ards supplied  are  either  of  an  unsuitable  character  or 
too  few  in  number. 

Investigation  proves  that  forged  writing  usually 
shows  characteristics  exactly  opposite  to  those  resulting 
from  unfavorable  surroundings  or  from  abnormal  con- 
ditions in  the  writer,  which  conditions  always  tend  to 
produce  distorted,  erratic,  incomplete  results.  Fraudu- 
lent writing  is  very  seldom  of  this  character,  but  shows 
painful  attention  to  details  and  a  studied  effort  to  pro- 
duce a  certain  definite  form  and  outline.  In  order  to 
explain  extraordinary  features  in  fraudulent  writing, 
unusual  external  conditions  are  frequently  invented,  and 
many  times,  when  attention  is  called  to  it,  the  incon- 
gruity between  the  supposed  conditions  and  the  written 
result  is  perfectly  apparent,  and  it  can  be  easily  shown 
not  only  that  the  conditions  described  are  in  themselves 
improbable  but  that  the  writing  in  question  does  not 
show  the  natural  effect  of  such  conditions. 

A  change  of  pen  may  apparently  transform  a  hand- 
writing and  make  it  quite  different  throughout,  but  a 
very  brief  investigation  will  usually  show  that  the 
change  is  merely  superficial.  A  change  in  pen  will  affect 
writing  by  changing  the  strength  or  width  of  line,  and 
a  stub  pen  may  change  the  location  of  the  apparent 
shadings,  which,  however,  as  illustrated  in  the  chapter 
on  writing  instruments,  are  not  due  to  increased  pres- 
sure but  to  the  relation  of  the  stroke  to  the  width  of  the 
point  of  the  pen.  A  stub  pen  thus  changes  the  appear- 
ance of  the  writing  very  materially  although  not  in  any 
really  fundamental  manner.  A  pen  of  any  kind  may 
be  in  such  poor  condition  that  it  will  hardly  write  at 


VARIATION   IN   GENUINE  WRITING  201 

all,  but  the  work  of  such  a  pen  is  easily  recognized. 

A  change  of  slant  in  a  writing,  which  is  the  most 
common  form  of  disguise,  changes  its  general  appear- 
ance in  a  striking  manner,  but  if  this  is  the  only  disguise 
it  is  easily  shown  to  be  perfectly  transparent.  A  mere 
change  in  size  of  writing  greatly  changes  its  appear- 
ance, but  this  change  is,  of  course,  only  superficial. 
Many  writers  think  that  their  writing  is  very  change- 
able and  radically  different  at  different  times  when  in 
fact  the  change  is  only  in  a  few  characteristics;  these 
changes,  however,  without  analysis  and  careful  examina- 
tion seem  very  pronounced  and  fundamental.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  two  opposite  writing  habits  do  not  co- 
exist. Writing  may  be  purposely  disguised,  but  even 
then  not  often  with  success,  and  this  being  true  it  is  not 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  unconscious,  natural  writing 
is  likely  to  show  fundamental  conflicting  habits. 

Most  writers  really  know  but  little  about  their  own 
writing  and  would  be  incapable  of  describing  it  orally 
with  no  means  at  hand  to  illustrate  it.  The  average 
person  cannot  even  tell  the  style  or  design  of  many  of 
the  letters  used,  without  making  them,  and  would  be 
totally  unable  to  point  out. and  describe  the  many  per- 
sonal peculiarities  in  his  own  writing  as  described  in 
this  book  in  the  chapters  on  simulated  forgeries  and 
anonymous  letters1. 

*We  all  of  us  have  a  definite  routine  manner  of  performing  certain 
daily  offices  connected  with  the  toilet,  with  the  opening  and  shutting  of 
familiar  cupboards,  and  the  like.  Our  lower  centres  know  the  order 
of  these  movements,  and  show  their  knowledge  by  their  "surprise"  if 
the  objects  are  altered  so  as  to  oblige  the  movement  to  be  made  in  a 
different  way.  But  our  higher  thought-centres  know  hardly  anything 
about  the  matter.  Few  men  can  tell  off-hand  which  sock,  shoe,  or 
trouser-leg  they  put  on  first.  They  must  first  mentally  rehearse  the 
act;  and  even  that  is  often  insufficient — the  act  must  be  performed. — 
William  James,  Principles  of  Psychology,  Vol.  1,  Chap.  IV.,  p.  115. 


202  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

To  ask  one  who  has  made  no  study  of  such  a  subject, 
to  change  offhand  all  these  fixed  and  unconscious  habits 
is  like  asking  one  who  speaks  broken  English  to  drop 
his  foreign  accent  at  once.  The  thing  cannot  be  done, 
because  one  cannot  avoid  that  which  he  cannot  see; 
he  cannot  omit  that  which  he  does  not  know  he  possesses, 
and  cannot  imitate  that  which  he  cannot  properly  inter- 
pret. Fundamental  differences  or  changes  in  style  or 
design  of  letters  alone  are  sometimes  wholly  attributed 
to  changed  conditions  entirely  inconsistent  with  the  re- 
sult shown.  For  example,  a  carefully  drawn  signature 
showing  retouching  and  the  most  careful  attention  to 
details,  in  one  case  was  excused  and  apologized  for  by 
saying,  "it  was  written  with  a  broken  pen  on  a  rough 
surface  with  the  writer  seated  in  a  rocking  chair." 

Many  important  questioned  documents  purport  to 
have  been  executed  by  old  people,  and  the  question  of 
eyesight  must  be  considered.  The  attempt  is  sometimes 
made  to  explain  away  unusual  features  by  saying  that 
the  light  was  poor  or  that  spectacles  were  forgotten. 
And  in  these  very  cases  the  writing  may  show  careful 
retracing  or  repairing  of  fine  lines,  perhaps  not  more 
than  one  one-hundredth  of  an  inch  in  w^idth,  an  act  which 
would  have  been  clearly  impossible  for  the  alleged  writ- 
er to  perform  even  with  the  aid  of  the  absent  spectacles. 

Genuine  signatures  written  under  such  conditions  by 
one  who  could  not  see  well  will  usually  show  unmis- 
takable evidences  of  the  fact;  they  will  not  usually  be 
in  just  the  right  position  and  on  the  line,  are  often  dis- 
connected and  broken  and  show  a  carelessness  and  un- 
finished condition  that  would  never  satisfy  a  forger.  The 
erratic  or  the  fixed  character  of  a  particular  handwrit- 


VARIATION  IN  GENUINE  WRITING  203 

ing  is  a  personal  characteristic,  however,  that  must  al- 
ways itself  be  considered  and  the  same  degree  of  diverg- 
ence must  be  differently  interpreted  under  different  con- 
ditions, depending  entirely  upon  the  habits  of  the 
writer  whose  writing  is  in  question. 

This  tendency  to  slight  divergence,  or  with  some 
writers  pronounced  divergence,  in  size,  proportions  and 
the  degree  of  care  given  to  certain  frequently  occurring 
words  may  be  a  most  forcible  and  convincing  means  of 
showing  that  a  whole  document  containing  considerable 
matter  is  not  genuine  but  a  careful,  studied,  unnatural 
simulation.  Such  a  document  will  almost  certainly  not 
contain  the  careless  divergencies  and  modifications  that 
are  shown  in  genuine  writings  of  any  considerable 
length.  Individual  words  may  be  imitated  with  con- 
siderable accuracy,  but  it  is  quite  probable  that  several 
modified  models  for  the  same  word  will  not  be  chosen, 
and  the  result  often  is  that  repeated  words  in  such  an 
imitation  are  in  their  uniformity  similar  to  rubber  stamp 
impressions.  In  comparing  two  documents  of  this  char- 
acter all  the  similar  words  from  the  document  in  ques- 
tion and  the  same  words  from  the  standards  should  be 
grouped  (see  Figs.  56,  110)  in  the  order  in  which  they 
occur  and  carefully  compared. 

Usually  there  is  about  genuine  writing  that  which 
proclaims  it  as  genuine,  and  one  of  the  things  that  may 
be  recognized  by  any  examiner  is  that  careless  abandon 
and  indifference  that  shows  that  the  writing  was  the  re- 
sult of  a  habit  and  not  the  conscious  following  of  a  copy. 
Freedom,  carelessness,  speed  and  illegibility  are  always 
earmarks  of  genuineness. 

The  slow,  drawn,  unnatural  and  generally  divergent 


204  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

character  of  a  forged  signature  is  sometimes  attributed 
entirely  to  the  fact  that  because  the  signature  is  at- 
tached to  an  important  document  it  was  written  with 
unusual  care  and  deliberation  which,  it  is  urged,  ac- 
counts for  the  divergence.  Naturally  those  who  seek 
to  profit  by  a  fraudulent  writing  offer  all  kinds  of  ex- 
cuses for  its  shortcomings  and  this  is  one  of  the  most 
popular.  It  is  claimed  that  the  importance  of  the  docu- 
ment led  the  writer  to  write  a  signature  differing  in 
fundamental  ways  from  any  other  writing  he  ever 
penned.  The  best  answer  to  this  contention  is,  of 
course,  the  bringing  forward  of  other  signatures  to  im- 
portant business  documents  as  standards,  but  this  is  not 
always  possible,  and  it  is  necessary  to  consider  this  phase 
of  the  question  of  disputed  writing. 

Investigation  shows  that  with  the  average  writer  a 
five  dollar  check  or  a  five  thousand  dollar  check  carry 
the  same  quality  of  signature  but,  as  stated  above,  con- 
ditions may  sometimes  change  the  character  of  writing, 
especially  with  those  with  whom  writing  is  an  unusual 
act  or  who  through  age  or  disease  write  with  great  dif- 
ficulty and  hesitation.  With  those  last  named  undue 
attention  to  the  writing  process  or  intense  realization 
of  the  importance  of  doing  it  well  may  render  it  nearly 
or  quite  impossible  to  write  at  all,  and  writing  produced 
under  such  conditions  will  necessarily  be  erratic  and 
broken  and  show  more  than  the  usual  lack  of  muscular 
control.  These  results,  however,  differ  fundamentally 
from  the  divergences  from  normal  writing  in  the  usual 
forgery,  which  is  not  likely  to  be  decrepit  and  incom- 
plete but  too  careful,  too  perfect,  too  conventional  and 
not  the  natural  product  of  an  unskilled  hand  writing 


VARIATION   IN   GENUINE  WRITING  205 

with  difficulty.  The  forger  does  not  dare  write  so  poor- 
ly and  in  so  broken  and  distorted  a  manner  as  results 
when  one  who  writes  with  difficulty  writes  also  under 
strain  or  excitement1. 


1We  are  not  always  sure  that  our  functions  run  best  when  we  con- 
centrate our  effort  on  them  and  turn  the  full  light  of  attention  on  the 
details.  We  may  speak  fluently,  but  the  moment  we  begin  to  give  at- 
tention to  the  special  movements  of  our  lips  and  of  our  tongue  in 
speaking  and  make  a  special  effort  to  produce  the  movements  cor- 
rectly, we  are  badly  hampered.- — Prof.  Hugo  Miinsterberg,  in  "On  the 
Witness  Stand."  1908. 

So  long  as  the  manner  and  degree  of  the  conscious  direction  of 
our  actions  may  vary,  it  follows  that  such  direction  may  be  wisely  or 
unwisely,  helpfully  or  disturbingly  applied.  And,  as  usual,  the  devia- 
tions from  the  normal  status,  particularly  under  the  influence  of  emo- 
tional susceptibility,  offer  the  most  ready  illustrations  of  this  sensitive 
equilibrium.  The  most  common  of  these  is  the  irrelevant  interference 
of  the  higher  centre  with  the  routine  activity  of  the  lower.  *  *  * 
For  it  is  true  that,  even  where  consciousness  does  not  so  decidedly  im- 
pede the  desired  result,  it  modifies  and  makes  unnatural  activities 
which,  when  performed  unawares,  are  performed  the  best. — The  Sub- 
conscious, by  Joseph  Jastrow,  1906,  p.  25. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

INDIVIDUAL  AND  GENERAL  CHARACTERISTICS  IN  WRITING 

Practically  every  one  in  this  land  of  education  will 
have  some  opinion  about  a  disputed  writing,  and  it  is  too 
often  assumed  that  any  one  who  can  write  is  qualified 
to  testify,  and  that  any  one  who  testifies  is  qualified  to 
do  so.  With  many  such  witnesses  the  slightest  similarity 
is  construed  as  identity,  or,  on  the  contrary,  the  most 
trivial  difference  may  be  interpreted  as  pointing  to  a 
different  writer. 

Errors  in  the  identification  of  handwriting  are  per- 
haps most  frequently  made  by  mistaking  certain  general 
system  or  national  features  for  individual  characteristics 
and  basing  a  conclusion  thereon1.  These  general  features 
may  be  very  forcible  as  evidence  pointing  to  a  writer 
of  a  particular  class,  but  not  by  them  alone  to  an 
individual  of  that  class;  and  this  applies  to  all  general 
characteristics  indicating  system,  nationality,  sex,  or 
occupation. 

lrThe  illustration  on  the  following  page  of  a  few  German  writing 
characteristics  that  sometimes  appear  in  English  writing  will  show 
how  easily  some  of  these  peculiar  forms  in  two  handwritings  might 
mislead  an  amateur  examiner  into  thinking  that  both  were  written 
by  the  same  writer.  Among  other  things  the  illustration  shows: 
(1)  The  peculiar  top  stroke  to  right  on  certain  letters.  (2)  The 
peculiar  small  e  like  c.  (3)  The  figure  7  with  a  cross  stroke.  (4) 
The  small  c  connected  at  top.  (5)  The  small  a  and  o  with  top  thrown 
far  over  to  left.  (6)  The  hyphen  with  two  strokes  and  sometimes 
vertical.  (7)  The  low  finish  of  the  small  t.  (8)  The  disconnected 
lower  loop  y.  (9)  The  exclamation  point  after  a  salutation.  (10) 
Capital  I  similar  to  English  F  or  Y.  (11)  The  small  s  with  stroke 
at  top. 

Some  of  these  forms  are  also  found  in  other  European  hands,  but 
all  are  found  in  the  German.  The  presence  of  one  or  more  of  these 
characteristics  in  a  writing  may  be  of  distinct  assistance  at  the  outset 
of  an  inquiry  as  a  means  of  discovering  a  possible  writer. 

[206] 


CHARACTERISTICS  IN  WRITING 


207 


It  is  a  fact,  however, 
that  in  cases  of  forgery 
it  is  usually  the  failure 
to  recognize  and  repro- 
duce these  very  charac- 
teristics that  shows  a 
writing  to  be  a  forgery, 
as  the  forger  may  omit 
a  fixed  system  or 
national  characteristic, 
which  he  does  not  see 
or  does  not  understand, 
which  may  be  as  signifi- 
cant as  the  slanting 
eyes  of  the  Chinaman, 
and  he  may  put  into  a 
system  of  writing  dif- 
fering radically  from 
his  own  certain  insis- 
tent but  unconscious 
characteristics  of  his 
own  style  which  mark 
the  writing  as  spurious. 

Errors  are  made  in 
identifying  writing  of 
a  foreign  style  because, 
as  we  have  seen,  the 

foreigner  brings  to  his  American  writing  that  which 
marks  it  as  distinctly  as  his  face  and  accent  show  his 
nationality,  and  if  a  handwriting  in  dispute  containing 
such  a  foreign  flavor  is  being  compared  with  writings  by 
a  different  writer  but  of  the  same  nationality  it  can 


FIG.  99  —German  Writing  Characteristics. 


208  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

readily  be  seen  how  an  uninformed  examiner  might  con- 
clude that  these  national  characteristics  show  individual 
identity  and  prove  that  both  writings  are  by  the  same 
hand.  This  same  error  may  be  made  in  identifying 
the  writing  of  those  following  a  distinctive  system  of 
writing,  the  general  characteristics  of  which  are  not 
known  to  the  examiner. 

Uninformed  graphologists,  who  undertake  to  deter- 
mine the  most  definite  and  detailed  mental  and  moral 
qualities  from  handwriting,  make  serious  errors  on  this 
very  point  by  attributing,  even  in  their  printed  books, 
definite  character  significance  to  certain  characteristics 
which  are  distinct  features  of  certain  systems  of  writ- 
ing. There  are  those  who  undertake  to  give  opinions 
on  complicated  and  difficult  handwriting  questions  who 
know  nothing  whatever  of  the  dates  and  features  of  the 
various  systems  of  American  writing,  or  of  the  most 
common  characteristics  of  foreign  writing,  and  with 
such  examiners  testifying  as  to  the  identity  of  two 
sets  of  writing  the  possibility  of  error  is  easily  under- 
stood. 

The  important,  fundamental  fact  to  keep  constant- 
ly in  mind  is  that  the  genuineness  or  otherwise  of  a 
writing  is  determined  not  alone  by  the  number  but  by 
the  nature  of  the  identical  or  differing  characteristics, 
and  a  positive  opinion  should  not  be  given  unless  an 
adequate  amount  of  standard  writing  for  comparison 
is  supplied,  and  then  only  after  a  careful  consideration 
of  all  the  facts.  As  with  any  subject,  superficial  knowl- 
edge or  hasty  examination  may  lead  to  serious  error. 

It  is  also  true  that  there  are  certain  questions  that 
cannot  be  answered  by  anyone,  and  the  honest  and  com- 


CHARACTERISTICS  IN  WRITING  209 

petent  man  in  any  field  does  not  hesitate  to  admit  his 
limitations  and  the  limitations  of  his  subject.  The  char- 
latan and  the  pretender  will  make  no  such  admissions, 
but  stand  ready  to  answer  at  once  any  question.  Neither 
is  the  really  qualified  specialist  in  any  subject  inclined 
to  give  an  unqualified  off-hand  opinion  under  any  condi- 
tions. The  data  supplied  in  some  cases  may  be  entirely 
too  limited  or  the  time  too  limited  to  permit  a  proper 
examination,  and  under  such  conditions  It  is  certainly 
better  to  reserve  judgment  than  to  jump  to  a  conclusion. 

As  we  have  already  seen  in  the  chapter  on  movement, 
a  writing  characteristic  is  any  element  or  quality  that 
serves  to  identify  a  writing  in  any  manner  or  degree; 
there  are  characteristics  common  to  many  nations,  and 
others  that  are  strictly  national  in  character;  there  are 
those  that  mark  a  certain  period  of  time,  and  others 
again  that  grow  out  of  a  certain  system  of  writing  or 
are  the  development  of  a  particular  occupation.  In  a 
thorough  writing  examination  these  varied  character- 
istics must  be  discovered,  analyzed  and  correctly  inter- 
preted. 

The  determination  of  the  relative  value  and  force  of 
characteristics  as  evidence  of  genuineness  or  identity  is 
the  vital  problem  for  the  writing  examiner  to  solve.  It 
is  impossible  to  illustrate  and  define  all  the  thousands 
of  actual  and  possible  characteristics  of  writing  and 
weigh  and  measure  their  comparative  values,  for  the 
reason  that  such  values  differ  with  different  writers  and 
under  varying  conditions,  and  this  tabulation  is  not  so 
important  as  the  discovery  of  some  of  the  principles  by 
which  the  force  and  significance  of  characteristics  are 
to  be  measured.  No  set  of  infallible  rules  can  be  formu- 


210  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

lated,  but  some  general  principles  can  be  stated  that 
seem  to  apply  in  most  cases. 

One  of  the  first  is  that  those  identifying  or  differen- 
tiating characteristics  which  are  most  divergent  from 
the  regular  system  or  national  features  of  a  particular 
handwriting  under  examination  are  of  the  most  force. 
The  second  important  principle  is  that  those  charac- 
teristics should  be  first  sought  for  and  be  given  the  most 
weight  which  are  of  an  inconspicuous  and  unobtrusive 
character  and  are,  therefore,  likely  to  be  so  unconscious 
that  they  would  not  be  omitted  when  the  attempt  is  made 
to  disguise,  and  would  not  be  successfully  copied  from 
the  writing  of  another  when  simulation  is  attempted. 
A  third  principle  is  that  ordinary  system  or  national 
characteristics  are  not  alone  sufficient  on  which  to  base 
a  judgment  of  identity  of  two  writings,  although  such 
characteristics  necessarily  have  some  value  as  evidence 
of  identity  if  present  in  sufficient  number  and  if  con- 
firmed by  the  presence  of  individual  characteristics. 

Any  character  in  writing  or  any  writing  habit  may 
be  modified  and  individualized  by  different  writers  in 
different  ways  and  varying  degrees,  and  it  is  clear  that 
the  writing  individuality  of  any  particular  writer  is 
made  up  of  all  these  common  and  uncommon  character- 
istics and  habits.  As  in  a  personal  description  it  is  the 
combination  of  particulars  that  identifies,  and  neces- 
sarily the  more  numerous  and  unusual  the  separate 
features  are  the  more  certain  are  we  of  the  identity. 

Two  writings  are  identified  as  being  by  the  same 
writer  by  the  absence  of  fundamental  divergences  and 
by  a  combination  of  a  sufficient  number  of  the  above 
described  characteristics  of  both  a  common  and  uncom- 


CHARACTERISTICS  IN  WRITING  211 

mon  nature  to  exclude  the  theory  of  accidental  coinci- 
dence. As  in  the  identification  of  a  person  by  general 
description  and  by  marks  and  scars,  no  fixed  rule  can  be 
laid  down  as  to  the  extent  of  proof  necessary  further 
than  the  appeal  to  ordinary  common  sense  and  intelli- 
gence. As  two  writings  are  connected  by  the  fact  that 
they  contain  a  combination  of  similar  characteristics  and 
that  there  is  an  absence  of  significant  divergencies,  the 
process  is  a  double  one,  positive  and  negative,  and 
neither  part  of  the  process  must  be  excluded  or  over- 
looked in  reaching  a  conclusion.  In  order  to  reach  the 
conclusion  of  identity  of  two  sets  of  writings,  there  must 
not  be  present  significant  and  unexplained  divergencies1. 


lrThe  principles  which  underlie  all  proof  by  comparison  of  hand- 
writings are  very  simple,  and,  when  distinctly  enunciated,  appear  to 
be  self-evident.  To  prove  that  two  documents  were  written  by  the 
same  hand,  coincidences  must  be  shown  to  exist  in  them  which  can- 
not be  accidental.  To  prove  that  two  documents  were  written  by  dif- 
ferent hands,  discrepancies  must  be  pointed  out  in  them  which  can- 
not be  accounted  for  by  accident  or  by  disguise.  These  principles  are 
easy  to  understand,  but  to  exemplify  them  in  observation  is  by  no 
means  always  easy.  It  is  not  the  merely  having  bodily  eyes  which 
enables  any  one  to  see  in  two  documents  either  discrepancies  or  coinci- 
dences. In  the  words  of  Epicharmus,  which  are  the  motto  of  this 
work,  "Mind  sees,  and  Mind  hears;  all  things  else  are  deaf  and  blind." 
*  *  *  *  It  is  idle  for  an  unpractised  volunteer  to  look  at  two  docu- 
ments, and  to  suppose  that  he  sees  what  is  in  them.  He  does  not  know 
what  to  observe.  He  may  fancy  that  two  handwritings  are  similar, 
when  their  essential  differences  are  numerous;  or  he  may  pronounce 
them  to  be  wholly  unlike,  when,  radically,  they  are  identical. 

Finally  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  evidence  of  the  identity  of 
Junius  and  Francis  as  handwriters  is  cumulative;  that  is  to  say,  the 
force  of  the  evidence  depends  not  on  any  one  single  coincidence,  but 
on  numerous  coincidences  varying  materially  in  their  individual 
strength,  which,  when  viewed  in  connection,  lead  irresistibly  to  one 
inference  alone,  though  each  by  itself  may  be  inconclusive.  A  com- 
mon fallacy  in  dealing  with  such  evidence  is  to  take  each  coincidence 
separately,  and  to  show  that  a  similar  coincidence  exists  in  some  other 
writer.  This  would  be  a  perfectly  legitimate  mode  of  reasoning,  if  any 
one  coincidence  so  dealt  with  were  adduced  as  in  itself  conclusive; 
but  it  fails  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  case,  when  the  argument  is 
based  on  the  combination  of  many  such  coincidences  collectively,  and 
not  on  the  separate  existence  of  any  one  of  them. — Handwriting  of 
Junius,  by  the  Honorable  Edward  Twistleton,  pp.  LXXV-KXXVII.. 
London,  1871. 


212  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Two  handwritings  in  the  same  language  must  in- 
evitably have  similarities,  but,  as  we  have  seen,  certain 
similarities  show  only  that  the  writers  belong  to  the  same 
class  or  nationality.  Although  all  writing  in  the  same 
language  is  bound  to  be  somewhat  similar,  like  men  of 
the  same  race,  from  this  fact  it  does  not  logically  follow 
that  individuality  cannot  be  distinguished.  It  would 
be  as  absurd  to  say  that  because  Americans  can  easily 
be  distinguished  from  Chinamen  that  therefore  all 
Americans  are  alike.  As  a  matter  of  fact  they  are  alike 
in  certain  race  features,  but  individuality  is  shown  by 
a  combination  of  variations  of  individual  and  general 
characteristics.  Writing  is  individualized  in  precisely 
the  same  manner. 

Writing  that  we  often  see  has  about  it  that  which  we 
instantly  recognize  as  something  that  gives  it  a  person- 
ality and  a  character  which  it  may  be  difficult  or  im- 
possible for  the  inexperienced  to  describe  and  analyze. 
It  is  not  the  form  alone  nor  any  one  feature  but  a  com- 
bination of  all  that  mainly  appeals  to  us,  and  we  name 
the  writer  without  hesitation.  This  individuality,  which 
is  recognized  even  by  the  untrained,  results  from  the 
combination  and  proportion  of  all  the  varied  elements 
which  make  it  up,  and  irrespective  of  individual  peculiar 
forms,  may  strongly  affect  judgment  as  to  identity. 
The  undisguised  handwriting  of  a  friend  thus  becomes 
to  us  almost  as  recognizable  as  the  friend's  face,  and  this 
general  appearance  or  pictorial  affect  is  always  of  as- 
sistance in  identifying  a  writing,  but,  it  must  be  added, 
is  also  the  means  of  leading  many  into  error  who 
are  not  able  to  distinguish  general  from  personal 
characteristics. 


CHARACTERISTICS  IN  WRITING  213 

This  instant  recognition  of  a  writing  simply  by  intui- 
tion the  careful  examiner  not  only  does  not  attempt  but, 
on  the  contrary,  studiously  avoids;  he  reserves  judgment 
until  the  characteristics  of  the  writing  have  all  been 
observed,  compared  and  carefully  weighed1. 

A  forged  or  simulated  handwriting  must  naturally 
resemble  somewhat  that  which  it  is  intended  to  resemble, 
and  a  disguised  writing  will  inevitably  diverge  in  some 
degree  from  a  genuine  writing  and,  as  stated  above,  the 
whole  problem  is  to  determine  and  show  what  charac- 
teristics are  of  controlling  force  as  a  basis  for  an  opinion2. 
A  signature  may  be  unusual  in  a  number  of  particulars 
and  yet  contain  undoubted  evidence  of  genuineness,  and 
again  a  signature  may,  in  general  appearance  and 
superficial  characteristics,  bear  strong  resemblance  to 

'The  specialist  of  every  class  is  constantly  tempted  to  do  more  or 
attempt  to  do  more  than  he  is  able  to  do  and  thus  become  a  kind  of 
fakir.  Many  succumb  to  the  temptation  and  bring  discredit  upon 
themselves  and  upon  their  specialty  by  the  effort  to  reach  conclusions 
by  other  than  scientific  methods.  Those  who  dabble  in  graphology 
seem  especially  inclined  toward  reliance  upon  inspiration  and  occult 
power.  The  competent  Mr.  Keene,  in  "The  Mystery  of  Handwriting," 
is  led  to  say:  "This  insight,  this  seer  faculty,  is  not  so  rare  as  might 
be  supposed,  and  under  proper  and  controlling  restrictions  is,  I  am 
confident,  one  of  the  highest  qualities  of  which  the  soul  is  capable. 
It  is  the  supreme  manifestation  of  intelligence,  and  perceives  clearly 
a  flash  of  the  Eternal  Truth.  Through  the  everyday  senses  we  see  as 
through  a  glass  darkly,  but  this  trained  and  developed  intuition  gives 
times  of  illumination  both  precious  and  exalting." 

The  scientific  man  will  continue  to  "see  as  through  a  glass  darkly" 
by  the  use  of  his  reason  and  his  senses  or  run  the  risk  of  getting  into 
that  condition  of  mind  in  which  he  is  unable  to  realize  how  ridiculous 
he  appears  to  the  entirely  sane. 

"The  unfortunate  rule  laid  down  by  Justice  Coleridge  in  the  con- 
trolling English  case,  followed  until  1854,  refusing  to  admit  standards 
(Mudd  vs.  Suckermore),  already  discussed  in  the  previous  chapter  on 
standards  of  comparison,  says,  "The  test  of  genuineness  ought  to  be 
the  general  resemblance  *  *  to  the  general  character  of  the  writ- 
ing." This  is  just  the  way  not  to  do  it  and  is  the  method  usually 
followed  by  the  inexperienced  and  the  uninformed.  "General  char- 
acter" in  a  writing  may  simply  point  to  the  old  round  hand  system, 
or  the  angular  system,  or  the  modern  vertical  style,  or  to  a  German 
writer,  and  it  is  easy  to  see  how  fallacious  such  a  "test  of  genuine- 
ness" may  be. 


214  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

the  writing  it  imitates  and  yet  upon  closer  examination 
be  positively  shown  to  be  a  forgery. 

As  was  considered  in  the  preceding  chapter  some 
writers  write  a  fixed  and  uniform  hand  that  diverges 
but  little  from  a  normal  type,  while  others  are  ex- 
tremely erratic,  and  these  facts  must  always  be  taken 
into  consideration  in  forming  a  judgment  in  such  a  case 
and  each  inquiry  must  be  weighed  and  measured  by 
itself  by  examination  of  the  standard  writing  in  the 
case.  The  fact  must  be  carefully  investigated  and  con- 
sidered as  to  the  manner  and  degree  in  which  writing  is 
affected  by  changes  in  conditions,  and  this  matter  must 
always  be  given  due  consideration  and  wreight  whether 
the  conditions  under  wrhich  the  writing  was  done  are 
known  or  not. 

That  a  questioned  and  a  genuine  handwriting  re- 
semble each  other  in  that  they  were  written  on  a  slant 
of  about  fifty-two  degrees  from  the  horizontal  would 
alone  be  of  little  significance  as  showing  identity,  ex- 
cept that  they  belong  to  the  same  general  class,  for  the 
reason  that  up  to  a  recent  date  this  has  been  the  normal 
slant,  nor  would  it  be  significant  as  showing  identity 
that  the  downward  strokes  all  slanted  alike,  because  this 
is  the  standard  form.  If,  however,  in  such  a  handwrit- 
ing it  is  shown  that  certain  letters  repeatedly  depart 
from  normal  forms  in  slant  and  for  no  apparent  cause, 
then  such  characteristics  at  once  become  significant.  As 
we  have  seen  there  is  but  little  significance  in  a  few  of 
these  similarities  in  standard  copy  book  forms,  except- 
ing in  combination  with  other  forms,  because  these  are 
to  be  expected  in  a  writing  of  that  class  or  system;  but 
just  in  proportion  as  such  forms  are  distorted  or  modi- 


CHARACTERISTICS  IN  WRITING  215 

fied  they  become  individualized  and  personal,  and  there- 
fore it  always  becomes  necessary  to  compare  a  ques- 
tioned writing,  not  only  with  the  genuine  writing  of 
the  alleged  writer,  but  also  with  the  normal  original 
writing  on  which  it  was  based.  To  know  whether  a 
characteristic  is  general  or  personal  it  is  necessary  to 
know  what  the  normal  forms  are;  the  examiner,  there- 
fore, should  know  what  the  writer  originally  aimed  to  do. 

Many  writers  have  various  forms  of  certain  letters 
under  command  and  make  any  one  of  two  or  even  three 
normal  styles  under  different  circumstances  and  condi- 
tions, and  a  few  such  divergencies  as  these  will  not  alone 
be  sufficient  to  differentiate  two  writings.  An  entirely 
different  design  of  letter  may  not  so  conclusively  indi- 
cate a  different  writer  as  a  persistent  and  peculiar  modi- 
fication or  distortion  of  a  minor  part  of  the  same  general 
type  of  letter.  In  one  case  the  writer  writes  from  an 
entirely  different  mental  pattern,  as  though  he  were  to 
make  an  entirely  different  letter  of  the  alphabet,  while 
in  the  other  case  a  slight  but  persistent  divergence  may 
be  very  strong  evidence  pointing  to  a  different  writer. 
This  is  a  point  that  requires  the  most  careful  attention. 

Some  systems  of  writing,  in  the  proportion  of  the 
long  and  short  letters  and  the  parts  of  letters  above  the 
line,  are  arranged  on  a  scale  of  one  to  two,  others  in  one 
to  three,  and  others  in  one  to  four  or  five ;  thus  the  small- 
est letter  above  the  line  would  be  one  space  high  and  a 
loop  letter  two,  three,  four  or  five  times  as  high,  accord- 
ing to  the  system.  When  a  person  is  taught  a  certain 
proportion  until  his  writing  has  become  a  fixed  habit 
he  finds  it  very  difficult  to  change  this  proportion  in  a 
definite  way,  and  persistent  uniform  divergence  through 


216  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

a  considerable  amount  of  writing  in  such  a  character- 
istic would  be  strong  evidence  of  a  lack  of  identity. 

In  every  handwriting  examination  the  alleged  date  of 
the  writing  in  question  and  the  actual  date  of  the  stand- 
ard writing  should  be  known.  The  standards  should  in- 
clude all  that  are  available,  within  a  certain  definite 
period  including  the  time  when  it  is  claimed  the  disputed 
writing  was  written.  If  it  is  alleged  that  either  set  of 
writings  was  produced  under  unusual  surroundings  of 
any  kind  this  fact  should  be  known  by  the  examiner.  If 
the  writer  was  subject  to  unusual  changes  in  physical  or 
mental  condition,  due  to  age,  disease  or  through  any 
cause,  this  also  should  be  known.  The  competent  ex- 
aminer, however,  must  know  to  what  extent  and  in  what 
manner  writing  is  affected,  changed  or  modified  by 
varying  conditions  and  must  give  due  attention  to  this 
phase  of  the  question  whether  he  has  any  information 
on  the  subject  or  not. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING  AND  MATHEMATICAL 
CALCULATIONS  APPLIED  TO  QUESTIONED  HANDWRITING 

It  hardly  seems  possible  that  there  could  be  so  many 
ways  of  doing  simple  things  as  are  shown  in  the  illustra- 
tions in  this  chapter  of  some  of  the  variations  of  a  few 
of  the  letters.  There  are  shown  sixty- three  divergent 
capital  I's,  forty-seven  differing  specimens  of  the  ab- 
breviation Co.,  twenty-five  divergent  examples  of  the 
abbreviation  N.  Y.,  fifteen  varieties  of  the  capital  E, 
and  thirty-six  different  methods  of  crossing  the  t! 
The  various  specimens  are  examples  of  actual  business 
writing,  not  one  letter  being  written  for  the  purpose  of 
illustration.  These  few  illustrations  do  something 
toward  showing  in  graphic  manner  the  marvelous  varia- 
tion in  handwriting,  especially  when  all  the  characters 
are  taken  into  consideration. 

Only  a  small  proportion  of  the  vast  variety  of  forms 
in  writing  can  be  accounted  for  by  tracing  them  back  to 
a  parent  system.  This  curious  and  unaccountable  varia- 
tion is,  of  course,  what  gives  to  handwriting  its  individ- 
uality, and  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that  every  mature 
handwriting  shows  peculiarities  which  in  combination  of 
all  the  characters  can  not  be  exactly  duplicated  in  the 
writing  of  any  other  person.  It  is  like  the  mysterious 
variation  in  human  personality  in  which  a  slight  varia- 
tion in  features,  proportions,  complexion  and  size,  in- 
dividualizes the  millions  of  members  of  the  human  f  am- 

[217] 


218  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ily.   Look  at  a  vast  crowd;  all  similar  yet  all  different! 

It  requires  much  study  and  analysis  to  discover  how 
it  is  possible  for  all  this  variety  in  handwriting  to  be  pro- 
duced, especially  when  we  consider  the  fact  that  variety 
is  not  sought  for  by  the  average  writer;  he  writes  as  he 
does  simply  because  that  is  his  way  of  doing  it. 

In  examining  a  collection  of  specimens  of  handwrit- 
ing certain  conspicuous  variations  at  once  attract  our 
attention.  Some  of  these  are:  (1)  design,  (2)  size, 
(3)  proportions,  (4)  slant,  (5)  shading,  (6)  vigor,  (7) 
artistic  finish.  When  we  observe  the  bewildering  variety 
in  design  of  a  group  of  letters ;  the  awkward  and  artistic, 
the  legible  and  illegible,  the  fanciful  and  the  prosaic,  the 
wide  and  the  narrow,  the  long  and  the  short,  the  round 
and  the  angular,  the  big  and  the  little,  it  seems  impos- 
sible that  another  variation  could  be  made,  and  then  we 
come  upon  still  another  one  different  from  all  the  rest! 
We  look  at  a  peculiar  form  and  are  inclined  to  wonder 
why  anyone  would  make  a  letter  like  that  and  others 
look  at  ours  and  think  the  same  thing1.  Examine  the 
examples  of  t  crossings  and  the  capital  I's  and  try  to 
imagine  what  the  varied  conditions  were  that  produced 
the  curious  results  there  shown.  In  a  study  of  design 
of  any  of  the  letters  illustrated  it  is  interesting  first  to 
see  if  our  own  letter  appears  in  the  collection. 

A  study  of  the  t  crossings  is  of  particular  interest. 
They  should  be  examined  with  special  reference  to  de- 
sign, direction,  position,  length,  and  shading.  Compare 
one  and  thirty  with  two  and  thirty-three;  one  with  five, 
and  seven  with  twenty-one ;  nineteen  and  twenty-two, 


*As  the  good  old  Quaker  lady  said  to  her  husband,   "Everybody  is 
queer  but  me  and  thee   and   sometimes,   dear,   thee   is  a   little   queer." 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          219 


FIG.  100— Thirty-six  examples  of  t  crossings,  all  taken  from  actual  business 

writing. 


220  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

and  twelve  and  thirteen;  eight  and  seventeen  and  ten 
and  thirty.  Observe  the  curiosities,  numbered  two,  three, 
eleven,  seventeen,  twenty-five  and  thirty-two.  Probably 
no  stroke  in  writing  is  so  clear  an  index  of  vigor  and 
some  other  personal  qualities  as  the  t  crossing,  and  if 
every  element  of  writing  were  as  eloquent  graphology 
would  have  a  more  definite  and  accurate  story  to  tell. 

In  the  capital  I,  in  addition  to  the  seven  special  points 
specified  above,  observe  the  different  places  and  direc- 
tions of  the  beginning  and  finishing  strokes,  also  the 
width  of  the  letter  in  proportion  to  its  height  and  the 
width  of  the  top  compared  with  the  bottom.  In  com- 
paring the  capital  I's  in  artistic  quality  the  attention 
is  attracted  to  nineteen,  writh  a  dot  over  it,  and  to  six 
with  its  clear-cut  outline,  and  four  in  contrast  with 
twelve.  On  the  question  of  vigor  compare  fifty-six 
with  twenty- four  and  twelve  with  fifty-nine;  in  shading 
observe  twenty-one  and  forty-six,  forty-eight,  twenty 
and  fifty;  in  size  compare  fifty-one,  fifty-three,  eight 
and  thirty-two.  See  the  two  capital  I's  with  dots,  nine- 
teen and  fifty-six,  and  among  the  freaks,  those  num- 
bered two,  four,  seven,  nine,  ten,  eleven,  thirty-four, 
forty-two  and  forty-five. 

The  differences  in  size,  proportions,  slant  and  shad- 
ing in  the  capital  E's  at  once  attract  attention,  and  the 
shape,  size  and  direction  of  the  connecting  loop,  between 
the  upper  and  lower  parts  of  the  letter,  show  peculiar 
variations. 

The  illustration  Co.  affords  an  excellent  opportunity 
to  compare  all  the  seven  variations  specified  above  and 
many  others.  In  proportions  compare  twenty-five  and 
forty-five,  both  taken  from  envelope  addresses,  as  all  the 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          221 


C 


FIG.  101 — Variations  of  the  capital  I  as  made  by  diiferent  writers.     All 
from  recent  American  writing. 


222 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


St 


FIG.    102— Thirteen  examples   of  the 
capital  I. 


others  were;  in  artistic 
finish  compare  thirty- 
eight  with  twenty-six  or 
eleven  with  twenty-three; 
in  size  compare  one  with 
fourteen  and  thirty-seven 
with  forty-seven;  in  slant 
compare  thirty-three  and 
forty-seven ;  in  shading 
compare  thirty-one  and 
forty-two  and  thirty  and 
forty-four. 

In  the  abbreviation  N. 
Y.  we  see  the  ancient  and 
the  modern  style,  the  big 
and  the  little,  the  plain 
and  the  flourished,  the 
light  and  the  shaded,  the 
artistic  and  the  awkward, 
and  yet  each  the  natural 
handwriting  of  some  one. 
In  view  of  the  peculiar 
and  divergent  habits 
shown  in  these  illustra- 
tions, which  include  only 
a  few  writing  characters, 
it  is  easy  to  understand 
why  it  is  so  difficult  for 
these  various  writers  to 


duplicate  each  other's  work  and  at  the  same  time  exclude 
their  own  individualities. 

Another  fundamental  variation  that  deserves  special 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          223 


-if 


FIG.  103 — The  abbreviation  Co.  from  envelope  addresses  of  business  letters. 

As  with  many  of  the  other  illustrations  much  detail  is  lost  in 

the  half-tone  reproductions  compared  with  the 

originals  or  with  the  photographs. 


224 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


ly 


O 


FIG.  104— The  abbreviation  N.  Y.  from  recent  business  envelopes. 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          225 


FIG.  105— Varieties  of  the  capital  E. 


FIG.  106 — Illustrations  of  connections  between 

strokes.     1,    Modern    vertical.     2,    Round 

hand.    3,  Spencerian.    4,  Angular  hand. 


226  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

attention  in  an  analysis  of  writing  is  that  of  angularity 
or  roundness,  especially  in  the  small  letters.  The  con- 
nections between  the  various  strokes  in  writing  vary 
from  very  acute  angles  to  broad  curved  connections  that 
represent  arcs  of  circles. 

There  are  shown  in  Fig.  106  four  different  systems 
of  writing  which  illustrate  the  wide  variation  in  this 
matter  of  connections  between  strokes.  The  first  is 
the  modern  vertical;  the  second,  the  old  round  hand; 
third,  the  Spencerian,  or  what  was  at  first  called  'the 
semi-angular  system;"  and  fourth,  the  angular  system. 
Any  considerable  collection  of  American  writing  will 
show  examples  of  all  four  styles.  From  the  character 
of  these  connections  alone  writing  can  be  classified 
into  at  least  three  well  defined  divisions;  (1)  circular, 
(2)  oblong,  or  elliptical,  (3)  angular.  A  very  slight 
change  in  the  nature  of  these  angles  changes  the 
whole  appearance  of  a  writing  in  a  very  pronounced 
way;  the  spacing  and  compactness  are  at  once  changed 
and  the  speed  is  also  in  a  measure  governed  by  the  width 
of  the  angles  between  the  strokes.  Slow  writing  usually 
shows  rounded  connections,  while  speed  always  tends  to 
narrow  the  width  of  angles.  Many  of  these  varied 
characteristics  are  as  unknown  to  the  average  writer  as 
the  number  of  ridges  on  the  bottom  of  the  feet,  and  it  is 
such  features  of  writing  that  most  successfully  baffle 
disguise  and  expose  forgery,  for  the  reason  that  we  can- 
not easily  discard  that  which  we  do  not  know  we  possess, 
nor  imitate  successfully  that  which  we  do  not  see. 

The  principle  underlying  the  identification  of  a  hand- 
writing is  the  same  as  that  by  which  anything  with  a 
great  many  possible  variations  is  identified  as  belonging 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          227 

to  that  class  or  being  that  particular  thing.  It  is  first 
necessary  to  establish  the  standard,  and  then  identity  or 
difference  is  shown  by  a  careful  comparison  of  all  ele- 
ments, features  or  characteristics  which  all  together  con- 
stitute the  basis  for  a  conclusion.  The  force  of  the  con- 
clusion is  naturally  governed  by  the  number  and  signifi- 
cance of  the  points  under  consideration,  ranging  from  a 
mere  conjecture  up  to  what  amounts  to  moral  certainty. 

There  are  many  close  analogies  between  the  identifica- 
tion of  an  individual  by  bodily  characteristics  and  the 
identification  of  a  handwriting  by  examination  of  its 
various  elements.  As  we  know  in  some  instances  identi- 
fication is  practically  certain,  but  in  others  only  probable, 
or  there  may  not  be  sufficient  basis  for  any  opinion.  If 
an  individual  is  sought  for  who  is  definitely  described 
as  follows:  (1)  exactly  five  feet  eleven  and  one-fourth 
inches  in  height,  (2)  blue  eyes,  (3)  brown  hair,  and  in 
addition  has  (4)  lost  his  left  thumb,  and  the  (5)  lower 
part  of  his  right  ear,  and  has  (6)  a  mole  on  his  left 
temple  one-half  inch  in  diameter,  and  (7)  a  tattooed 
anchor  on  the  back  of  his  left  hand,  and  a  (8)  narrow 
scar  five  inches  long  on  his  right  forearm,  and  an 
individual  is  found  who  exactly  matches  these  eight 
points  of  identity,  we  say  without  hesitation  that  we  have 
undoubtedly  found  the  man  decribed.  We  promptly 
conclude  on  these  eight  points  alone  that  this  man  differs 
from  all  the  other  millions  of  men  on  the  earth.  Theo- 
retically there  may  be  other  such  men  but  we  say  con- 
fidently that  it  is  so  strongly  against  common  sense  and 
all  experience  to  expect  it  that  it  is  practically  impossible. 

This  problem  is  capable  of  a  mathematical  solution 
if  we  first  agree  on  the  basis  for  the  calculation.  It  is 


228  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

possible  to  show  mathematically  how  vastly  improbable 
it  would  be  for  these  eight  separate  points  of  identity 
to  coincide  in  two  individuals.  We  must  first  determine 
how  often,  or  rather  how  seldom,  each  feature  will  be 
found  separately  and  then,  by  a  mathematical  formula, 
as  fixed  as  the  multiplication  table,  we  determine  how 
often  coincidence  of  all  the  features  may  be  expected. 
This  formula,  as  given  by  Professor  Simon  Newcomb, 
is  as  follows:  "The  probability  of  concurrence  of  all 
the  events  is  equal  to  the  continued  product  of  the  prob- 
abilities of  all  the  separate  events."  If  one  thing  will 
occur  once  in  twenty  times  and  another  once  in  twenty 
the  probability  of  the  two  occurring  in  conjunction  is 
represented  by  the  fraction  which  is  the  product  of  one- 
twentieth  and  one-twentieth  or  one  four-hundredth1. 


1Calculus  of  Probabilities:  the  application  of  mathematical  reason- 
ing- to  the  art  of  judging-  in  cases  where  only  probable  evidence  can 
be  obtained.  .  .  The  mathematical  solution  of  problems  in  prob- 
abilities consists,  first,  in  dividing  the  possible  processes  or  results  into 
elementary  and  equally  probable  cases;  and,  secondly,  in  finding  how 
many  of  these  cases  favor  the  proposed  event.  .  .  It  cannot  be 
doubted  that  an  understanding  of  this  calculus  would  afford  a  very 
material  aid  to  judgment  in  weighing  and  estimating  the  probabilities 
of  events  in  the  affairs  of  life;  for,  although  these  events,  or  the 
causes  which  give  rise  to  them,  cannot  generally  be  made  the  subject 
of  mathematical  calculation,  yet  the  examination  and  enumeration  of 
the  various  combinations  of  circumstances  which  may  give  rise  to  an 
event  affords  our  only  means  of  judging  of  its  probability.  The  longer 
a  man's  experience  of  worldly  affairs  and  the  sounder  his  judgment, 
the  more  nearly  he  will  conform  to  the  rules  and  methods  of  the 
mathematical  calculus  in  estimating  probabilities.  An  eminent  writer 
happily  described  the  calculus  of  probabilities  as  common  sense  ex- 
pressed in  numbers.  .  .  If  the  concurrence  of  a  large  number  of 
circumstances  is  necessary  to  the  production  of  an  event,  each  of  these 
circumstances  may  be,  in  itself,  very  probable,  and  yet  their  concur- 
rence, and  consequently  the  event  itself,  very  improbable.  The  mathe- 
matical rule  for  determining-  probability  in  such  a  case  is  that  the 
probability  of  the  concurrence  of  all  the  events  is  equal  to  the  con- 
tinued product  of  the  probabilities  of  all  the  separate  events.  .  . 

One  of  the  principal  marks  of  the  practical  wisdom  of  age  and  ex- 
perience is  the  ability  to  recognize  this  principle,  and  there  are  plenty 
of  proverbs  which  are  really  founded  on  it. 

Professor  Simon  Newcomb,  formerly  Professor  of  Mathematics  and 
Astronomy,  Johns  Hopkins  University,  in  The  Universal  Cyclopaedia. 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          229 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  the  practical  impossibility 
of  these  eight  personal  features  all  being  exactly  dupli- 
cated in  two  individuals  we  can  make  so  small  the  frac- 
tion representing  how  frequently  each  point  may  be 
found  that  it  is  certainly  within  the  fact  and  will  be 
promptly  granted.  For  number  one,  the  exact  height, 
we  will  say  that  in  every  ten  men  we  shall  find  one  who 
exactly  measures  as  therein  described,  of  the  second  or 
eye  color  one  in  three,  of  the  third  one  in  four,  of  the 
remaining  five  points  we  will  say  that  out  of  every  two 
hundred  men  one  will  be  found  precisely  answering  one 
of  each  of  the  peculiar  descriptions  specified,  although 
for  some  of  these  accidental  and  unusual  features  more 
than  one  in  ten  thousand  would  certainly  be  too  many 
to  expect. 

We  now  have  our  separate  events  represented  by  eight 
fractions,  one-third,  one-fourth,  one-tenth  and  five  frac- 
tions each  of  one-two-hundredth.  Now,  assuming  that 
our  problem  is  to  determine  how  frequently  all  these 
peculiarities  and  elements  that  have  accidentally  com- 
bined in  this  one  individual  would  be  likely  to  be  exactly 
duplicated  in  another  individual,  we  find  by  applying 
Professor  Newcomb's  rule  that  the  continued  product  or 
the  mathematical  probability  is  one  in  thirty-eight  tril- 
lions and  four  hundred  billions,  (38,400,000,000,000), 
or  more  than  thirty  thousand  times  the  total  population 
of  the  globe,  and  we  naturally  conclude  if  we  find  an 
individual  who  answers  the  description  that  we  have 
found  the  man  and  that  there  is  not  another  man  who 
has  had  the  same  things  happen  to  him. 

To  say  that  such  remote,  improbable  and  shadowy 
events  as  that  represented  by  the  fraction  named  are 


230  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

practically  impossible  conveys  a  more  accurate  impres- 
sion to  the  mind  than  to  say  that  they  are  remotely  prob- 
able. Mathematically  speaking  such  a  fraction  is  cer- 
tainly a  "negligible  quantity."  Any  one  of  ten  thousand 
different  things  may  happen  to  one  individual,  and  thus 
he  becomes  the  definite  combination  of  a  few  of  the 
thousands  of  things  that  might  have  marked  him.  The 
improbability  of  a  definite  combination  arises  from  a 
specification  of  the  certain  few  that  are  to  occur  and  the 
exclusion  of  all  the  others  that  might  have  occurred. 

It  is  well  understood  that  certain  personal  character- 
istics are  vastly  more  significant  than  others  as  indicating 
identity  and  the  same  is  true  of  handwriting  character- 
istics. Naturally  those  things  most  abnormal  and  acci- 
dental are  more  significant  than  those  that  are  general 
and  usual,  although  here  again  the  large  number  of  the 
separate  "events"  of  a  low  fraction  may  render  it  ex- 
ceedingly improbable  that  they  will  all  unite  at  one  time. 
Scars  and  deformities  in  personal  features  are  exactly 
paralleled  in  handwriting  by  mutilations,  abbreviations 
and  personal  inventions  and  peculiarities,  which  in 
number  in  all  their  possible  combinations  go  up  into 
the  thousands. 

It  is  sometimes  contended,  by  those  whose  interests 
make  such  contention  necessary,  not  only  that  two  hand- 
writings might  be  exactly  alike,  but  that  such  an  event 
would  not  be  at  all  unusual  or  unexpected.  It  is  plausi- 
bly argued  that  thousands  learn  the  same  system  and 
that  the  natural  result  is  identity.  Without  investiga- 
tion this  may  seem  to  be  true  but  the  facts  show  that  it  is 
not.  If  those  taught  were  all  identical  then  the  result 
might  be  uniform. 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.          231 

Any  system  of  writing,  as  we  have  seen,  puts  its  im- 
press upon  a  class  or  nation  of  writers,  but  such  impress 
does  not  by  any  means  produce  a  slavish  uniformity  as 
any  one  knows  who  examines  the  sub j  ect  even  in  a  super- 
ficial manner.  Variation  begins  as  soon  as  writing  be- 
gins and  continues  till  each  writer  writes  in  the  way 
that  seems  best  and  easiest  to  him.  Only  young  school 
children  write  with  comparative  uniformity,  because  they 
have  never  used  writing  in  a  practical  way,  but  even 
they  do  not  write  exactly  alike.  Even  in  school  as  soon 
as  writing  begins  to  be  used  for  any  other  purpose  than 
to  learn  it,  variation  at  once  begins  and  any  teacher 
knows  how  impossible  it  is  to  get  an  adult  class,  even 
when  they  are  attempting  to  do  so,  to  write  all  alike. 
The  failure  in  the  new  vertical  system  began  when  the 
writing  came  to  be  used  outside  of  school  in  a  practical 
way. 

What  we  find  in  the  examination  of  actual  writing 
is  the  result  shown  in  the  illustrations  in  this  chapter; 
that  is,  a  pronounced  and  unaccountable  variation.  We 
see  at  once  that  identity  in  two  complete  adult  writings 
is  so  remote  a  possibility  as  to  be  practically  impossible. 
The  amount  of  writing  must  necessarily  always  be  con- 
sidered, but  total  coincidence  is  so  remote  that  even  iden- 
tity of  a  small  amount  of  writing  is  very  improbable. 

Let  us  see  just  what  a  proposition  it  is  to  expect  com- 
plete identity  in  two  handwritings.  We  must  imagine 
groups  of  the  variations  of  each  of  the  eighty  or  more 
characters  in  English  script  with  from  a  dozen  to  a 
hundred  or  more  variations  in  each  group.  Now,  we 
take  one  of  the  capital  I's  from  that  group,  one  t  cross- 
ing, one  Co.  and  one  N.  Y.  and  so  on  through  the 


232  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

eighty  characters  until  we  have  a  complete  set.  Then 
we  must  select  a  group  of  occasional  letters  and  varia- 
tions until  we  have  exemplified  a  complete  handwriting. 
The  proposition  now  is  to  go  out  and  find  a  writer  who 
will  duplicate  in  his  writing  every  one  of  these  selected 
characteristics.  The  improbability  is  simply  ridiculous 
and  we  say  at  once  it  cannot  be  done.  Even  if  the 
probability  of  making  a  particular  form  in  each  group 
were  as  low  as  one-fifth,  to  have  this  combined  on  the 
same  ratio  with  a  particular  form  in  all  the  other  groups 
would  make  a  probability  represented  by  a  fraction 
with  one  for  a  numerator  and  the  eightieth  power  of 
five  as  a  denominator.  The  number  is  too  stupendous 
even  to  write. 

The  same  problem  may  be  stated  in  another  way. 
We  will  say  that  movement  or  manner  of  writing  will 
be  represented  by  the  fraction  one-half;  that  is  to  say 
that  all  writers  write  in  one  of  only  two  possible  styles 
of  movement,  and  let  pen  position,  slant,  shading,  size 
and  alignment  each  be  represented  by  the  fraction  one- 
half.  The  various  letters,  characters,  abbreviations  and 
pen  marks  in  English  writing  are  more  than  eighty  in 
number,  with  scores  of  variations  and  modifications  of 
each  style  which,  when  taken  all  together  in  the  great 
variety  of  handwritings,  are  numbered  by  the  thousand. 
We  will  assume  that  all  characters  except  forty  will  be 
made  exactly  alike  and  that  those  forty  will  each  have 
but  one  possible  modification  of  one  kind  in  one  direction 
instead  of  many  as  is  the  fact.  We  now  have  as  repre- 
senting our  separate  "events"  forty-six  fractions  each 
of  one-half  and  the  question  to  determine  is  how 
frequently  will  this  or  any  other  particular  selected 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.         233 

group  of  varying  forms  and  habits  all  combine  in 
another  handwriting.  Applying  the  rule  again  we 
find  that  even  on  this  low  basis  the  mathematical 
probability  of  two  complete  handwritings  being  identi- 
cal is  one  in  something  more  than  sixty-eight  trillions 
(68,000,000,000,000). 

It  is,  of  course,  true  that  hardly  in  any  investigation 
will  all  the  characters  of  a  handwriting  enter  into  any 
inquiry,  but  by  reference  to  the  particulars  enumerated 
for  examination  in  the  chapters  on  simulated  forgeries 
and  anonymous  letters  it  will  readily  appear  what  an 
extended  basis  for  calculation  there  is  in  connection 
with  the  examination  of  the  various  elements,  features 
and  characteristics  of  even  a  single  signature1. 

Fraudulent  and  questioned  writing  may  be  roughly 
divided  into  two  general  classes,  first  forged  or  simu- 
lated writing  in  which  the  attempt  is  made  to  discard 
one's  own  writing  habits  and  assume  the  writing  person- 
ality of  another,  and  second  that  class  of  writings  that 
are  disguised  in  which  the  writer  simply  seeks  to  hide 
his  own  personality.  Mathematical  calculations  may  be 
employed  with  either  class  of  writings  to  show  difference 


'It  is  a  surprise  to  most  people  to  know  that  in  the  Bertillon 
system  of  measurements  by  means  of  which  criminals  are  identified, 
only  eleven  measurements  are  made.  By  these  few  measurements 
accurately  made  and  a  general  description  of  the  individual  any  one 
of  hundreds  of  thousands  can  be  positively  identified.  Experience  has 
shown  that  the  probability  of  these  few  characteristics  exactly  com- 
bining in  two  individuals  is  so  remote  that  it  is  perfectly  safe  to  assume 
that  it  is  impossible.  A  necessary  part  of  the  system  is  the  classifica- 
tion of  the  measurements  and  descriptions  so  that  out  of  thousands  on 
file  it  is  possible  to  find  the  measurements  of  an  individual  under 
suspicion  who  has  already  been  measured. 

The  measurements  are:  (1)  height,  (2)  stretch  from  finger  tips  to 
finger  tips,  (3)  trunk  or  height  sitting,  (4)  head  length,  (5)  head 
width,  (6)  cheek  width,  (7)  right  ear  length,  (8)  left  foot  length,  (9) 
left  middle  finger  length,  (10)  left  little  finger  length,  (11)  left  cubit 
or  forearm. 


234  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

or  identity,  whichever  the  fact  may  be.  A  forger  who 
seeks  simply  to  abandon  his  own  writing  personality, 
which  is  exceedingly  difficult  if  not  impossible,  and  at 
the  same  time  assume  that  of  another,  which  is  still  more 
difficult,  will  almost  certainly  fall  short  of  perfection 
by  errors  in  both  these  particulars.  Errors  of  commis- 
sion consist  in  putting  in  what  is  not  usual  and  habitual, 
and  even  though  it  may  be  possible  to  find  in  a  sufficient 
amount  of  standard  writing  separate  approximate 
examples  of  every  unusual  characteristic  appearing  in  a 
questioned  signature,  those  individual  characteristics 
may  be  so  rare  that  the  combination  of  all  of  them  in  one 
signature  would  be  so  improbable  as  to  amount  to  very 
strong  evidence  of  forgery1. 

If  among  other  indications  of  a  lack  of  genuineness 
we  find  six  unusual  form  characteristics  in  a  single 
signature  each  of  which  it  is  claimed  appears  partly 
exemplified  once  in  fifty  genuine  signatures,  but  never 
with  two  in  the  same  signature,  what  is  the  mathematical 
likelihood  on  this  basis  of  all  of  them  appearing  in  one 
signature?  We  have  as  the  separate  events  six  fractions 


lrrhere  are  at  least  two  distinct  causes  which  we  can  see  at  work 
whenever  experience  improves  discrimination: 

First,  the  terms  whose  difference  comes  to  be  felt  contract  dis- 
parate associates  and  these  help  to  drag  them  apart. 

Second,  the  difference  reminds  us  of  larger  differences  of  the  same 
sort,  and  these  help  us  to  notice  it. 

Let  us  study  the  first  cause  first,  and  begin  by  supposing  two  com- 
pounds, of  ten  elements  apiece.  Suppose  no  one  element  of  either 
compound  to  differ  from  the  corresponding  element  of  the  other  com- 
pound enough  to  be  distinguished  from  .it  if  the  two  are  compared 
alone,  and  let  the  amount  of  this  imperceptible  difference  be  called 
equal  to  1.  The  compounds  will  differ  from  each  other,  however,  in  ten 
different  ways;  and,  although  each  difference  by  itself  might  pass 
unperceived,  the  total  difference,  equal  to  10,  may  very  well  be 
sufficient  to  strike  the  sense.  In  a  word,  increasing  the  number  of 
"points"  involved  in  a  difference  may  excite  our  discrimination  as 
effectually  as  increasing  the  amount  of  difference  at  any  one  point. — 
Principles  of  Psychology,  by  William  James,  Vol.  1,  p.  510. 


VARIETY  OF  FORMS  IN  HANDWRITING,  ETC.         235 

of  one-fiftieth  and  we  find  on  this  basis  that  the  mathe- 
matical probability  of  just  these  unusual  characteristics 
all  appearing  together  in  one  signature  is  only  once  in 
several  hundreds  of  millions. 

Assuming  that  the  premises  are  correct,  such  improb- 
ability is  certainly  strong  evidence  on  this  question.  The 
proper  answer  to  the  inquiry  whether  the  production 
of  two  such  signatures  on  the  same  day  or  even  in 
succession  is  possible  would  be  that  it  would  be  practi- 
cally impossible  although  theoretically  it  might  be  re- 
motely possible.  Those  on  the  wrong  side  of  a  case 
may  be  obliged  to  base  a  hope  on  fractions  as  small  as 
one  one-hundred  millionth. 

Mathematical  calculations  may  be  employed  with 
much  force  in  the  examination  of  traced  forgeries  where 
the  model  signature  is  found  or  where  companion 
forgeries  are  produced  which  were  made  from  the  same 
model.  This  question  is  further  discussed  in  the  chapter 
on  Traced  Forgeries. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES 

As  the  name  clearly  signifies,  a  simulated  forgery  is 
a  simulation  or  imitation  of  a  genuine  writing.  A 
forgery  of  this  class  is  produced  by  a  method  similar  to 
that  employed  by  a  pupil  in  following  a  copy.  It  is  not 
always  possible  to  tell  by  what  method  a  fraudulent 
writing  was  made  but  it  throws  some  light  on  the  in- 
vestigation of  the  subject  to  consider  briefly  some  of  the 
inevitable  conditions  surrounding  the  act  of  forgery. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  important  to  remember  that  the 
act  is  a  crime  and  is  performed  with  the  knowledge  that 
while  success  may  perhaps  bring  a  great  reward,  failure 
may  bring  punishment  and  disgrace.  The  crime  neces- 
sarily is  always  one  of  secrecy  around  which  must  be 
grouped  corroborating  circumstances  of  time  and  place 
and  conditions.  These  are  carefully  planned  and  then, 
with  preparations  all  made,  the  door  locked  and  the 
curtains  drawn,  the  act  is  stealthily  performed. 

It  is  of  interest  to  consider  what  preparation  the  fab- 
ricator may  have  had  for  his  difficult  undertaking.  The 
history  of  such  crimes  shows  that  in  most  cases  he  is  a 
beginner,  a  tyro  in  such  a  role,  who  not  only  has  had 
no  experience,  but  has  made  no  special  preparation  what- 
ever for  such  a  task  and  does  not  realize  its  difficulty. 
This  being  true  it  is  easy  to  anticipate  what  the  result 
will  be ;  the  work  is  not  likely  to  be  well  done.  It  is  in- 
deed fortunate  that  the  rare  one  or  two  in  every  com- 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  237 

munity  who  might  do  such  an  act  well  are  seldom  in- 
clined to  commit  forgery  and  that  he  who  attempts  it 
is  not  usually  an  adept. 

To  return  to  him  who  sets  out  on  the  way  of  the  trans- 
gressor, let  us  consider  what  effect  the  conditions  we 
have  outlined  may  have  upon  the  forger  himself.  It  is 
well  known  that  even  with  those  possessing  the  requisite 
skill,  foolish  errors  of  omission  or  commission  in  the 
production  of  a  forged  paper  often  prove  so  conclusively 
that  the  writing  is  a  forgery  that,  in  this  as  in  many  other 
crimes,  the  truth  seems  to  proclaim  itself.  The  explana- 
tion of  these  errors  undoubtedly  is  that  the  mind  is  so 
riveted  on  certain  details  of  the  act  that  other  matters 
of  importance  are  entirely  overlooked1.  Realization  of 
the  fact  that  forgery  is  a  criminal  act,  the  fear  of  dis- 
covery, and  the  painful  anxiety  to  do  the  work  well,  all 
combine  to  bring  about  a  mental  and  muscular  condi- 
tion that  make  it  very  difficult  if  not  altogether  impos- 
sible to  do  the  work  in  a  skillful  manner,  and  an  actual 
criminal  forgery  undoubtedly  always  is  a  much  poorer 
piece  of  work  than  could  be  executed  by  the  same  writer 
merely  as  an  exhibition  of  skill.  This  intense  fixing 
of  the  attention  on  the  matter  and  process  of  writing 

JThe  fact  that  it  is  more  difficult  to  produce  a  criminal  forgery 
than  to  make  an  imitation  as  a  test  of  skill  has  an  important  bearing 
on  certain  so-called  tests  that  are  sometimes  applied  to  those  who 
undertake  to  distinguish  a  forged  writing.  It  sometimes  seems  to  be 
assumed  that  if  any  one  can  imitate  any  writing  by  anybody  so  that  it 
cannot  at  once  be  recognized  as  an  imitation  then  this  proves  that 
one  who  can  not  at  once  recognize  it  as  an  imitation  is  not  qualified  to 
testify  on  the  subject.  The  unfair  and  unscientific  character  of  such 
a  test  is  apparent  on  its  face.  If  a  test  is  parallel  to  the  main  inquiry 
then  it  is  right  and  proper;  otherwise  it  is  not. 

If  any  one  assumes  to  have  such  ability  then  by  all  means  the 
test  should  be  applied.  As  described  in  the  chapter  on  standards  of 
comparison  there  are  those  who  through  presumption  or  through 
ignorance  will  undertake  to  do  what  the  most  experienced  and  com- 
petent will  not  attempt. 


238  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

makes  it  extremely  difficult  to  write  even  one's  own  hand 
in  a  free  and  natural  manner,  and  under  such  conditions 
to  be  required  to  imitate  sucessfully  the  writing  of  an- 
other is  a  task  of  the  very  greatest  difficulty. 

Forgeries  nearly  always  show  plainly  the  natural  re- 
sults of  such  strained  conditions;  too  much  attention  is 
given  to  unimportant  details  and  a  drawn,  hesitating, 
and  unnatural  appearance  is  shown  in  the  writing,  even 
if  it  is  a  quite  accurate  copy  of  the  main  features  of  the 
genuine  writing  imitated1.  It  usually  is  not  a  good 
imitation  of  form  characteristics  and  thus  fails  even  in 
the  elementary  part  of  the  process. 

To  forge  a  writing  with  entire  success  one  must  first 
be  able  to  see,  and  then  must  have  the  muscular  skill 
necessary  to  reproduce  the  significant  characteristics  of 
the  writing  of  another  and,  at  the  same  time,  eliminate 
the  characteristics  of  his  own  writing.  The  result  usual- 
ly shows  failure  in  both  directions  because  the  forger 
does  not  determine,  and  is  not  able  to  determine,  what 
the  most  significant  characteristics  are  in  the  writing 
which  is  being  imitated,  and  even  less  does  he  recognize 
and  interpret  the  controlling  characteristics  of  his  own 
writing  so  that  he  may  not  unconsciously  include  them 
in  the  forgery.  As  we  have  seen,  simulation  in  almost 
every  case  gives  attention  to  the  conspicuous  features 
of  form  only  and  the  many  other  elements  entering  into 
the  task  receive  no  attention  whatever. 

It  is -very  much  more  difficult  to  simulate  an  unfamiliar 
movement  than  an  unfamiliar  form,  and  to  copy  un- 
familiar forms  and  at  the  same  time  write  freely  in  an 

Examples  of  movements  in  writing  inconsistent  with  genuineness 
are  shown  in  Figs.  53,  54.  The  illustrations  show  that  these  writings 
must  have  been  produced  in  a  halting,  slow,  drawing  manner. 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  239 

unusual  manner  is  simply  impossible.  Writing,  natural- 
ly unconscious  and  automatic,  follows  the  fixed  grooves 
of  habit,  but  as  soon  as  attention  is  given  to  it  it  neces- 
sarily becomes  strained  and  unnatural.  Self-conscious- 
ness of  a  familiar  act  always  tends  to  produce  unnatural- 
ness,  and  as  fraudulent  writing  is  inevitably  written  with 
the  attention  fixed  on  the  process  of  writing,  this  is  one 
of  the  main  reasons  why  it  is  not  well  executed1. 

It  is  important  that  the  writing  process  itself  be  ex- 
amined with  some  care  for  the  purpose  of  determining 
what  bearing  it  may  have  on  the  forger's  undertaking. 
Writing  is  the  result  of  a  very  complicated  series  of  acts, 
being  as  a  whole  a  combination  of  certain  forms  which 
are  the  visible  result  of  mental  and  muscular  habits 
acquired  by  long  continued,  painstaking  effort.  That 
which  is  seen  as  writing  is  the  end  aimed  at,  but  this  is 


xWe  note  how,  accordingly,  the  quality  of  a  performance  will  vary 
and  take  its  tone  from  the  mental  conditions  of  its  execution.  Rivalry 
excites  our  latent  powers  and  sharpens  the  edge  of  our  endeavors; 
yet  the  very  presence  of  a  considerable  stake  may  act  to  upset  the 
nicer  poise  of  our  exertions  through  over-anxiety.  .  .  .  There  are 
relatively  few  players  who  do  quite  as  well  at  tournaments  and  at  the 
critical  moments  of  play  as  upon  less  momentous  occasions;  and  the 
anxiety  of  the  performer  makes  itself  felt,  and  complexly,  in  the  re- 
port of  his  own  consciousness.  Over-guidance  by  the  higher  centres 
thus  cripples  the  efficiency  of  the  work  of  the  lower.  .  .  . 

Walking,  talking,  writing,  dressing,  drawing,  sewing,  using  a  type- 
writer, playing  upon  a  piano  or  violin,  riding  a  bicycle,  handling  a 
tool,  a  tennis  racquet,  or  a  golf  club  may  all  serve  as  illustrations  of 
the  path  of  progress  of  such  acquisitions,  involving  various  and  vari- 
ously complex  co-ordinations  of  mental,  sensory,  and  motor  factors. 
In  each  case  the  several  parts  of  the  acquisition  must  be  repeatedly 
introduced  to  consciousness  and  held  in  the  focus  of  attention,  until 
both  senses  and  muscles  appreciate  their  respective  tasks.  It  will  also 
not  escape  observation  that  as  the  habit  or  accomplishment  is  ac- 
quired, the  effort  involved  diminishes,  the  skill,  that  is,  the  nicety  of 
adjustment  of  impulse  to  the  desired  achievement,  and  the  avoidance 
of  unnecessary  or  round-about  exertion,  increases,  and  facility  be- 
comes an  expressing  of  the  decreasing  demand  upon  a  directive  at- 
tention. We  can  then  do  things  well  not  only  without  half  attending, 
but  also  without  half  trying. — The  Subconscious,  by  Joseph  Jastrow, 
Professor  of  Psychology,  University  of  Wisconsin,  pp.  28,  42.  (1906.) 


240  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

only  the  record  of  the  more  fundamental  part  of  the 
process,  which  is  a  series  of  controlled  movements  grow- 
ing out  of  the  imitation  of  certain  arbitrary  forms.  A 
written  form  is  simply  a  record  of  a  motion,  and  mature 
writing,  by  numberless  repetitions,  finally  becomes  what 
the  psychologist  calls  an  unconscious  co-ordinated  move- 
ment. We  write  as  we  repeat  poetry  "by  heart,"  each 
part  automatically  suggesting  that  which  is  to  follow. 
Many  kinds  of  acquired  skill  become  as  automatic  as 
walking  or  speech  and  are  carried  to  the  point  where 
the  operation  not  only  requires  no  conscious  direction 
but  is  actually  almost  beyond  control  of  the  mind  and 
hand.  Writing  is  a  conspicuous  example  of  such  a  habit 
and  cannot  be  discarded  or  assumed  at  will1. 

The  perfection  of  a  forgery  depends  in  a  measure 
upon  certain  other  conditions  that  it  may  be  helpful  to 
consider  briefly.  That  writing  is  imitated  with  the  great- 
est difficulty  which  is  strong,  smooth,  free  and  rapid  and 
that  cannot  be  correctly  reproduced  by  a  slow,  careful, 
copying  movement,  and,  naturally,  a  hand  that  is  slow 
and  hesitating  and  that  is  itself  produced  by  interrupted, 

1Writing,  which  is  essentially  a  co-ordinated  movement,  has  to  be 
developed  through  trial  after  trial,  with  consciousness  directed,  not 
upon  the  movement  itself,  but  on  the  visual  images  which  appear  as 
results  of  the  movement.  What  one  is  training  is  the  movement; 
what  one  is  thinking  of  is  not  movement  at  all,  but  visual  images. 
When  the  movement  becomes  well  enough  trained  so  that  one  need  not 
have  any  anxiety  about  its  operating  well,  then  attention  is  withdrawn 
in  great  measure  from  even  the  visual  forms. 

This  automatic  character  of  adult  writing  is  one  of  its  most  in- 
teresting and  significant  characteristics.  Because  the  habit  is  so 
thoroughly  automatic,  we  do  not  recognize  it  in  ordinary  experience 
as  a  subject  worthy  of  study.  We  come  to  think  of  it  as  we  do  of  a 
hundred  other  automatic  habits — as  a  natural  endowment.  Of  course 
it  is  not  a  natural  endowment.  More  than  most  of  our  highly  de- 
veloped habits,  more  than  walking  or  talking,  for  example,  writing 
has  become  automatic  through  individual  practice. — Charles  Hubbard 
Judd,  Ph.  D.,  Professor  of  Psychology,  University  of  Chicago,  in  Genetic 
Psychology.  Chapter  VI.,  pp.  187,  188  (1903). 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  241 

changing  movement  impulses  is  more  easily  imitated 
because  its  manner  of  production  is  similar  to  that  of 
the  imitating  process.  The  perfection  of  a  forgery  also 
depends  upon  the  amount  of  the  writing  involved  and 
upon  whether  the  nature  of  the  document  permits  many 
attempts  only  the  best  of  which  it  becomes  necessary  to 
bring  forward. 

Although  the  usual  forgery  is  not  a  good  piece  of 
work  it  is  wrell  to  know  and  to  remember  that  there  are 
adepts  who  can  imitate  certain  classes  of  writing  so  well 
that  no  one  can  tell  the  imitation  from  the  genuine,  and 
certain  kinds  of  awkward,  unskillful  signatures  may  be 
simulated  so  perfectly,  even  by  those  who  are  not  adepts, 
that  the  fraudulent  can  not  readily  be  distinguished 
from  the  genuine.  Its  importance  seems  to  justify  the 
repetition  of  the  statement  that  not  much  weight  should 
be  given  the  opinion  of  one  who  pretends  to  be  able  to 
detect  any  forged  or  imitated  writing,  criminal  or  other- 
wise, produced  by  any  writer,  no  matter  how  skillful, 
and  under  any  conditions  no  matter  how  favorable  to 
the  operator. 

A  scientific  study  of  writing  must  include  considera- 
tion of  all  these  mental  and  physical  means  by  which  it 
is  produced  and  the  evidences  of  the  operations  as  shown 
in  the  writing  itself.  Thus  the  form  of  a  letter  is  not 
simply  an  arbitrary  outline,  like  an  unfamiliar  drawing, 
to  be  compared  with  a  similar  outline  but,  as  already 
described,  is  the  visible  illustration  of  habits  which  are 
themselves  to  be  studied  and  compared  with  the  physical 
and  mental  habits  in  the  writing  brought  forward  for 
comparison. 

Many  of  the  important  things  to  which  attention 


242  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

must  be  given  have  already  been  described  in  the  pre- 
ceding chapters,  but  it  may  be  useful  in  this  connection 
briefly  to  review  some  of  them  and  show  their  direct 
application  to  a  thorough  handwriting  comparison. 

We  have  seen  that  the  line  or  stroke  itself  shows  the 
speed  and  continuity  of  motion  with  which  it  is  made, 
the  muscular  skill  employed  in  the  operation,  the  rela- 
tion of  the  pen  to  the  surface  of  the  paper,  the  nature 
of  the  movement  employed  in  making  the  stroke  as 
shown  by  its  force  and  freedom,  and  the  quality  and 
uniformity  of  the  line  as  indicating  continuity  of  motion 
and  uniformity  of  pressure  of  the  writing  instrument. 
The  edges  of  the  stroke,  the  locations  of  the  shadings  in 
relation  to  the  line  of  writing,  and  particularly  the  tracks 
of  the  nibs  of  the  pen,  show  the  angle  of  the  writing 
instrument  to  the  strokes  as  made.  The  design  of  the 
letters  themselves  may  point  to  the  nationality  of  the 
writer,  to  the  system  learned,  to  the  date  when  the  writ- 
ing was  acquired  and  to  the  influences  that  have  sur- 
rounded the  writer.  Here  the  value  of  historical  knowl- 
edge of  systems  of  writing  becomes  highly  important, 
and,  as  we  have  seen,  there  are  many  forms  and  styles 
in  writing  that  would  be  entirely  inconsistent  with 
certain  other  forms  and  systems. 

Considering  these  facts  it  will  clearly  appear  how 
superficial  and  unscientific  is  that  examination  of  hand- 
writing which  gives  attention  only  to  conspicuous  form 
characteristics  of  letters,  with  no  knowledge  of  their 
history  and  no  interpretation  of  their  significance,  and 
it  is  evident  how  unreliable  a  conclusion  may  be  if  based 
solely  upon  such  comparison.  When  all  the  varied  ele- 
ments are  considered  that  enter  into  the  process  of  writ- 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  243 

ing  it  is  seen  how  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  it  is  to 
imitate  forms  accurately  and  at  the  same  time  correctly 
exemplify  all  these  other  characteristics  of  a  writing; 
and  it  becomes  still  more  difficult  for  a  forger,  under 
the  strain,  fear,  and  anxiety  surrounding  the  act,  to 
assume  all  the  writing  characteristics  of  another  and 
at  the  same  time  throw  off  all  his  own  writing  individual- 
ity. In  most  cases  it  cannot  be  done. 

Evidence  regarding  handwriting  may  affect  property, 
liberty,  or  even  life,  and  prudence  and  justice  demand 
that  a  final  and  definite  conclusion  on  the  subject  should 
not  be  reached  by  witness,  judge,  referee  or  jury  until 
the  matter  has  been  examined  from  all  standpoints  in 
a  thorough  and  systematic  manner;  an  offhand  opinion 
on  any  such  question  of  importance  should  never  be 
given. 

If  it  is  feasible  it  is  usually  advisable  that  such  an 
investigation  should  begin,  not  with  an  examination  of 
the  questioned  writing  itself,  but  by  a  careful  study  of 
the  standard  writing  with  which  it  is  finally  to  be  com- 
pared, and  this  study  of  the  genuine  writing  should  be 
made,  if  possible,  before  the  questioned  writing  is  seen 
by  the  examiner.  The  genuine  writing  should  be  gone 
over  step  by  step,  as  outlined  in  the  preceding  chapters 
and  in  the  condensed  procedure  at  the  conclusion  of 
this  chapter,  and  should  be  studied  and,  in  some  cases, 
tabulated,  classified,  averaged  and  measured,  until  the 
examiner  actually  begins  to  recognize,  as  it  were,  its 
complexion,  features  and  characteristic  individuality.  It 
is  also  desirable  in  some  cases  that  this  preliminary 
examination  of  the  genuine  writing  be  made  at  two 
sittings  with  a  few  hours  or  a  day  intervening  so  that 


244  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

all  the  first  steps  may  be  carefully  reviewed  before  any 
comparison  is  made  with  the  disputed  wrriting.  This 
allows  the  mind  after  rest  and  attention  to  other  matters 
to  come  back  and  renew  acquaintance  with  that  which  at 
first  was  strange  and  unfamiliar. 

The  second  stage  of  such  an  examination  is  the  study 
of  the  questioned  writing  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
genuine  writing  has  been  studied  and,  if  the  conditions 
permit,  its  careful  tabulation  and  classification,  and  the 
third  and  final  operation  is  an  exhaustive  comparison  of 
the  two  writings.  Too  many  times  this  order  of  ex- 
amination as  described  is  not  only  reversed  on  the  first 
examination  but  almost  all  the  time  is  unprofitably  given 
to  the  questioned  writing,  and  frequently,  if  not  usually, 
an  adequate  amount  of  standard  writing  for  comparison 
is  not  at  first  supplied. 

The  first  test  applied  to  a  disputed  writing  by  nearly 
every  examiner  is  the  test  of  general  appearance  or 
pictorial  effect  as  compared  with  the  genuine  standard 
writing.  This  test  is  first  because  it  is  an  almost  uncon- 
trollable operation  of  the  mind  and,  unfortunately, 
many  examiners  go  no  further  except  to  look  for  evi- 
dence to  fortify  a  first  impression.  The  danger  of  entire 
dependence  upon  this  phase  of  writing  has  been  pointed 
out  in  a  previous  chapter.  It  is  true  that  there  is  in  the 
combination  of  arbitrary  characters,  connected  as  writ- 
ten letters  are  connected,  a  certain  proportion  of  parts, 
a  particular  average  width  of  angle  and  turn  by  which 
letters  are  connected  which,  independent  of  designs  of 
letters,  give  to  writing  a  certain  individual  character 
as  a  whole. 

It  is  this,  in  a  measure,  indefinable  general  appearance 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  245 

or  pictorial  effect  of  writing,  on  which  the  bank  clerk 
must  mainly  depend  in  paying  checks,  as  it  would  be 
impossible  under  the  circumstances  to  make  a  careful 
analysis  and  examination  of  all  the  characteristics  of  a 
writing  at  the  paying  teller's  window.  A  careful  and 
scientific  examination  of  a  handwriting  always  includes 
careful  attention  to  this  general  appearance  and  analyzes 
and  points  out  its  features,  but  in  arriving  at  a  final 
conclusion  does  not  by  any  means  depend  entirely  upon 
it.  As  has  been  suggested  the  bare  intuition,  although 
often  helpful  and  pointing  the  true  way,  is  an  unsafe 
guide,  and,  at  the  outset,  should  always  be  subordinated. 
At  first  glance  a  writing  may  seem  to  be  genuine  which 
upon  careful  analysis  and  examination  is  clearly  seen 
to  be  a  forgery,  and  again  a  writing  may  at  first  view 
look  somewhat  suspicious  which  will  prove  to  be  genuine 
when  carefully  examined. 

Every  questioned  writing  should  also  be  examined 
with  a  view  of  determining  whether  by  itself  and  without 
comparison  with  any  writing  it  shows  evidence  of  fraud 
as  indicated  by  line  quality,  retouching,  hesitation,  pen 
lifts,  interrupted  movements,  identity  of  forms  with  a 
model,  or  any  evidences  of  unnatural,  drawn  writing. 

A  barefaced  and  bungling  forgery  may  be  detected 
at  sight ;  the  careful  examiner,  however,  will  not  identify 
a  wTriting  as  genuine  at  sight,  nor  give  a  final  and  positive 
opinion  to  that  effect  until  he  has  examined  it  by  good 
daylight;  until  he  has  examined  it  with  the  microscope 
under  different  magnifications  by  both  direct  and  trans- 
mitted light;  and,  in  some  instances,  no  opinion  should 
be  given  until  enlarged  transmitted  light  photographs 
of  the  writing  have  been  made. 


246  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

In  submitting  writings  to  an  examiner  for  an  opinion 
the  procedure  and  order  of  presentation  as  outlined 
above  should,  if  possible,  be  followed,  and,  if  the  ques- 
tioned writing  cannot  be  distinguished  by  other  condi- 
tions than  those  in  the  writing  itself,  it  is  well  to  submit 
it  to  the  examiner  with  the  genuine  writings  without  any 
information  as  to  which  document,  paper  or  writing  is 
suspected.  In  whatever  way  the  question  is  presented 
no  outside  facts  bearing  on  the  question  of  genuineness 
should  be  given  until  after  a  definite  opinion  has  been 
rendered. 

In  order  that  study  and  comparison  of  the  two  writ- 
ings may  include  consideration  of  every  feature,  element 
and  condition  that  may  throw  any  light  on  the  inquiry, 
the  following  detailed  and  numbered  list  of  points  for 
consideration  is  given.  They  do  not  all  apply  to  every 
case,  but  if  an  examiner  goes  through  the  list  the  features 
of  importance  will  receive  attention. 

General  Features :  ( 1 )  General  appearance,  or  picto- 
rial effect.  (2)  General  style  or  system  of  writing;  (a) 
old  style  round  hand,  (b)  old  Spencerian,  (c)  modern 
Spencerian,  (d)  foreign,  (e)  modern  commercial,  (f) 
angular,  (g)  new  vertical,  (h)  telegraphers'  hand,  etc. 

(3)  Slant;    (a)    of   downward   strokes,    (b)    upward 
strokes;  average  and  exceptions  tested  by  protractor. 

(4)  Spacing  of  letters  in  words  and  words  in  sentences. 

(5)  Size;  of  capitals,  of  small  letters,  uniformity  of  size. 

(6)  Proportions  of  individual  letters  to  each  other, 
proportions  of  parts  of  the  same  word.     (7)  Pen  lifts; 
general  habits,  before  what  letters  and  after  what  letters. 
(8)    Connections  of  all  letters  with  each  other  and  of 
capitals  with  small  letters.      (9)    Habitual,  occasional 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  247 

and  rare  forms  of  all  small  letters  tabulated.  (10) 
Forms  of  all  varieties  of  capitals  tabulated  in  the  same 
manner.  (11)  Forms  of  figures,  punctuation  marks, 
abbreviations,  original  characters  or  letters  tabulated. 
(12)  Individual  or  original  form  characteristics  or 
idiosyncrasies.  (13)  Flourished,  abbreviated  or  illiterate 
forms  of  letters  and  characters1. 

Movement  or  Manner  of  Writing  :  (14)  Movement; 
Finger,  Hand,  Arm,  or  Combined,  Free  or  Restricted. 
(15)  Speed  of  writing  as  shown  by  line  quality;  (a) 
very  slow,  (b)  slow,  (c)  medium,  (d)  rapid,  (e)  very 
rapid,  (f)  uniformity  or  consistency  of  speed.  (16) 
Care  and  attention  to  the  writing  process;  (a)  utter 
abandon  and  carelessness,  (b)  normal  average  care,  (c) 
delicate  attention  to  every  detail  even  to  the  end  of 
unimportant  strokes,  (d)  inconsistent  attention.  (17) 
Quality  of  line,  its  smoothness  or  roughness  as  a  re- 
sult of  the  manner  of  writing;  on  up  strokes,  on  down 
strokes,  on  beginning  and  on  finishing  strokes.  (18) 
Position  of  pen  in  hand  and  relation  to  paper  as  shown 
by  location  of  shading  and  indentations  on  right  or  left 
of  line.  (19)  Alignment  or  relation  of  parts  of  the 
whole  line  of  writing,  or  the  line  of  individual  letters 
in  words  to  base  line,  showing  relation  of  arm  to  base 
line  of  writing.  (20)  Occasional  letters  high  or  low. 
(21)  Movement  impulse  or  motion  beginning  with  or 
before  begirihing  of  stroke  and  continuing  beyond  or 
stopping  with  stroke  as  shown  by  blunt  or  sharp  begin- 


characteristics  are  further  discussed  in  the  chapter  on 
Anonymous  and  Disputed  Letters  and  where  applicable  the  procedure 
there  outlined  should  also  be  carefully  followed.  Some  of  the  direc- 
tions regarding  the  examination  of  an  alleged  forgery  of  a  whole 
document,  given  in  the  latter  part  of  this  chapter,  also  apply  to  some 
signature  forgeries. 


248  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

nings  and  ends  of  words.  (22)  Flourishes  or  extra 
strokes.  (23)  Abbreviations  or  deficient  strokes. 

Pen  Pressure  and  Shading:  (24)  Shading;  on  all 
capitals,  on  all  small  letters,  on  figures.  (25)  Location 
of  shading  on  letters;  on  main  downward  strokes,  on 
lateral  strokes,  on  diagonal  strokes.  (26)  Line  quality, 
smooth,  rough,  irregular.  (27)  Exact  location  of  nib 
marks  and  maximum  shades.  (28)  Pen  strokes;  heavy 
and  strong  or  weak  and  light.  (29)  Tremor;  of  age, 
of  illness,  of  weakness,  of  fraud.  (30)  Location,  uni- 
formity and  extent  of  tremor.  (31)  Pen  Pressure, 
delicate  or  heavy,  uniform  and  consistent  or  varied  and 
inconsistent.  (32)  Beginning  of  strokes  with  fine  line 
or  with  pressure,  ending  stroke  with  fine  line  or  with 
pressure  or  dead  stop.  (33)  Marks  of  pen  nibs;  pres- 
sure uniform  on  both  nibs,  or  heaviest  on  left  or  right 
nib.  (34)  Edges  of  Lines;  clear  cut  or  ragged;  magni- 
fied indentations  uniform  on  both  edges;  larger  on  left 
or  on  right.  (35)  Uniformity  of  Line,  as  affected  by 
halting  movement,  stops  or  variations  in  speed  showing 
whether  letters  are  carefully  drawn  or  freely  written. 
(36)  Final  strokes;  carefully  drawn  and  finished,  or 
free  and  unconscious.  (37)  Use  of  blotter;  no  blotting, 
immediate  blotting  or  occasional  blotting. 

Special  Features:  (£8;  Erasures;  by  abrasion,  by 
chemicals,  by  rubbe£xx(39)  Retouching;  of  light  lines, 
shaded  lines,  of  unimportant  strokes.  (40)  Pen  stops; 
at  angles,  at  narrow  turns,  on  curves  at  unnatural  places, 
on  first  stroke,  on  last  stroke.  (41)  "t"  crossings  and 
"i"  dots;  location,  shape,  direction  and  care.  (42) 
Decreasing,  increasing,  irregular  or  uniform  height  of 
small  letters  in  words.  (43)  Spacing  or  opening  be- 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  249 

tween  capital  letters,  between  words,  between  capital 
and  first  small  letter  of  same  word.  (44)  Relation  of 
writing  to  ruled  or  imaginary  base  line,  regular,  irregu- 
lar, all  above  the  line,  all  on  line,  or  all  below.  (45) 
Alignment  or  Inclination;  all  upwards  continuously, 
each  word  upward,  perfectly  horizontal,  each  word 
downward,  signature  all  downward,  all  in  arc  of  circle, 
or  zigzag  up  and  down.  (46)  Indentation  of  paper 
shown  on  front  or  back,  made  by  pen  or  by  pencil.  (47) 
Pencil  marks  under  or  in  connection  with  pen  marks. 

Paper  and  Ink:  (48)  Surface  of  paper  examined 
by  transmitted  light  and  by  oblique  lighting  to  observe 
disturbance  of  fiber,  dulling  of  finish,  or  change  of 
tint.  (49)  Folds  across  writing;  before  writing,  after 
writing.  (50)  Ink,  compared  with  that  usually  em- 
ployed as  to  class,  quality,  condition,  exact  color  ex- 
amined by  daylight  in  shaded  portions,  light  portions, 
when  blotted,  when  not  blotted,  tested  and  recorded  by 
color  microscope.  (51)  Color  or  tint  at  edges  and  ex- 
tremity of  strokes.  (52)  Age  of  writing  as  shown  by 
condition  of  ink.  (53)  Uniformity  of  ink  throughout 
writing.  (54)  Retouching  indications  examined  by 
transmitted  light  to  show  presence  of  double  or  over- 
lapping ink  films;  frequency  and  exact  locations  of 
retouched  strokes. 

Writing  Instrument:  (55)  Kind  and  quality  of  pen 
used;  fine,  coarse,  stiff,  or  elastic,  old  or  new.  (56) 
Fountain,  stylographic,  gold,  steel,  or  quill  pen.  (57) 
Width  of  shaded  and  fine  lines.  (58)  Pencil;  ordinary 
or  copying,  hard  or  soft,  sharp  or  blunt,  light  or  heavy 
pressure,  wet  or  dry  pencil  mark. 

Reproduction  of  Document:   A  helpful  operation  in 


250  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

an  exhaustive  preliminary  examination  of  a  questioned 
writing  or  document  is  its  reproduction  in  as  nearly  as 
possible  the  exact  manner  in  which  it  is  claimed  to  have 
been  produced  and  also  in  the  manner  in  which  it  was 
probably  produced.  For  this  reproduction  every  physi- 
cal circumstance,  as  far  as  possible,  should  be  the  same 
as  surrounded  the  production  of  the  document  in  ques- 
tion, pen,  ink  and  paper  should,  if  possible,  be  the  same 
and  every  detail  in  a  document  of  folding,  endorsing, 
mailing,  filing,  copying,  etc.,  should  be  repeated.  If 
typewritten  the  same  machine  should  be  used  and  sig- 
natures should  be  affixed  following  as  closely  as  possible 
the  disputed  or  questioned  paper.  If  a  disguised  or 
feigned  hand  has  been  employed  the  writing  should  be 
reproduced  imitating  in  every  way  as  nearly  as  possible 
the  writing  or  pen-printing  of  the  document  in  question. 
This  careful  reproduction  of  a  questioned  document  or 
writing  often  leads  to  more  accurate  conclusions  in  some 
particulars  than  would  otherwise  be  reached  and  in  this 
way  attention  may  be  directed  to  important  matters  that 
might  be  overlooked. 

Simulation  of  a  Whole  Document. 

As  the  amount  of  forged  writing  is  increased  natural- 
ly the  difficulty  of  forgery  is  greatly  increased  and 
some  new  difficulties  arise  that  deserve  consideration 
in  this  connection.  Daring  forgeries  of  this  class  are 
occasionally  produced  by  operators  who,  as  a  rule,  have 
no  conception  of  the  great  difficulty  of  the  undertaking. 
When  looked  at  as  a  whole  such  documents  may  appear 
to  be  strikingly  like  the  writing  they  were  made  to 
imitate  and  many  are  inclined  to  say  offhand  that  they 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  251 

must  be  genuine  because  it  is  assumed  that  no  one  would 
undertake  so  difficult  a  task.  The  principal  difficulty 
in  examining  such  a  paper  is  to  look  at  one  thing  at  a 
time  instead  of  depending  on  the  "general  character" 
of  the  writing.  A  thorough  examination  of  such  a 
paper  will  sometimes  show  to  a  moral  certainty  that  it 
can  not  be  genuine. 

A  comparatively  brief  examination  of  the  question 
will  show  that  the  successful  forgery  of  a  whole  docu- 
ment is  a  task  of  extreme  difficulty  and  requires  intel- 
ligent attention  to  many  particulars  and  details  that  do 
not  enter  into  the  task  of  fabricating  only  a  signature. 
If  such  a  document  is  of  any  considerable  length  it  is 
almost  certain  to  differ  in  many  ways  from  the  genuine 
writing  of  which  it  is  an  imitation. 

On  the  question  of  writing  habits  such  a  paper  must 
not  only  exemplify  the  ordinary  and  usual  letter  forms 
of  the  one  whose  writing  is  imitated,  but  it  must  also 
show  the  natural  variation  in  design,  proportions,  size 
and  spacing,  that  any  considerable  quantity  of  genuine 
writing  always  shows.  It  must  also  exemplify  habits 
of  pen  position  and  movement  and,  what  is  the  most 
difficult  of  all  to  attain,  must  in  its  various  parts  show 
that  careless  abandon,  disregard  of  details  and  inatten- 
tion to  the  writing  process  that  is  always  one  of  the  most 
forcible  indications  of  genuineness.  At  the  same  time 
such  a  paper  must  show  that  evidence  of  continuity  and 
consistency  with  itself  that  points  to  a  continuous 
natural  writing.  If  such  a  complete  fraudulent  docu- 
ment shows  close  conformity  to  design,  outlines  and 
variations  of  letters  it  will  almost  certainly  show  slow, 
painful  movement  and  a  painstaking  attention  to  details 


252  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

which  are  inconsistent  with  free,  honest  writing,  and, 
if  it  is  written  freely,  it  is  almost  certain  to  be  defective 
in  design  and  will  not  exemplify  the  significant  form 
characteristics  of  the  writing  imitated.  It  is  almost 
inevitable  that  a  fraudulent  document  of  any  consider- 
able length  will  show  defects  in  both  directions. 

A  complete  document  of  this  kind  usually  shows  by 
mere  inspection  that  it  is  not  a  free,  natural  writing,  and 
as  a  rule  such  a  writing  is  more  defective  in  manner  of 
production  or  movement  than  in  designs  of  individual 
letters.  As  with  a  signature  imitation  the  simulation  of 
a  movement  or  manner  of  writing  is  much  more  difficult 
than  the  copying  of  the  outlines  of  letter  or  word  forms, 
and,  as  in  signature  forgeries,  the  principal  if  not  the 
only  thought  in  the  mind  of  the  forger  seems  to  be  the 
thought  of  form.  The  process  of  forgery  involving  a 
brief .  signature,  as  we  have  seen,  naturally  induces  a 
constrained,  fixed  and  nervous  attention  to  the  process 
of  writing,  that  is  almost  certain  to  show  in  the  result, 
and  this  applies  with  greatly  added  force  when  a  whole 
document  is  forged ;  letters  are  drawn,  rather  than  writ- 
ten, and  inequalities  in  strokes,  interrupted  movements, 
pen  lifts,  retouching  and  a  general  painstaking  atten- 
tion to  details  are  almost  certain  to  be  the  result  of  such 
an  effort. 

The  conditions  surrounding  the  production  of  a  com- 
plete fraudulent  document  of  this  character  are  similar 
to  those  under  which  a  disguised  anonymous  letter  is 
written.  The  successful  production  of  such  a  complete 
paper,  however,  is  a  task  of  much  greater  difficulty  than 
the  hiding  of  personality  in  an  anonymous  letter  because 
the  successful  simulation  of  a  complete  document  in- 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  253 

volves  the  double  process  of  discarding  the  writer's  own 
writing  characteristics  and  at  the  same  time  the  adop- 
tion of  the  characteristics  of  another. 

At  the  very  beginning  of  such  an  inquiry  regarding 
a  document  in  which  all  the  writing  is  in  question  it  is 
well  to  go  over  carefully  the  preliminary  steps  outlined 
in  the  preceding  part  of  this  chapter  and  also  the  parts 
of  the  chapter  on  anonymous  letters  relating  to  incon- 
spicuous characteristics.  Examination  should,  of  course, 
be  made  of  the  general  appearance  of  the  whole  paper, 
but  much  time  is  lost  in  such  examinations  and  no 
definite  result  is  reached  by  looking  all  the  time  at  the 
questioned  paper  as  a  whole  instead  of  examining  in 
order  and  in  detail  its  constituent  parts.  In  some 
methods  of  examination  of  a  document  it  seems  to  be 
expected  that  if  one  will  only  look  at  the  whole  thing 
intently  enough  and  long  enough  that  a  message  from 
somewhere  will  be  flashed  out,  saying,  "This  is  a 
forgery,"  or  "This  is  a  genuine  writing." 

The  principal  points  to  consider  in  the  examination 
are :  1st.  Normal  form  characteristics  of  every  character 
as  previously  outlined.  2d.  Variations  in  genuine  forms 
under  varying  conditions  in  design,  size,  completeness, 
•abbreviation.  3d.  Arrangement  of  matter  on  page,  in- 
cluding spacing  between  lines  and  words,  margins  at 
left,  right,  top  and  bottom.  4th.  Continuity  and  con- 
sistency, abrupt  and  unnatural  changes  in  size,  slant,  or 
rapidity  of  writing.  5th.  Undue  attention  to  unim- 
portant details  as  shown  by  labored  production  of  first 
and  last  strokes  of  words,  careful  and  uniform  "t" 
crossings,  accurately  placed  "i"  dots,  carefully  drawn 
flourishes,  grace  lines  or  any  unnecessary  strokes.  6th. 


254  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Pen  lifts  at  unnatural  places  or  in  what  should  be  free 
strokes,  on  curves  and  ovals,  the  careful  joining  of  the 
ends  of  fine  strokes  at  unusual  places,  unnatural  stops 
in  the  middle  of  letters.  7th.  Patching,  repairing,  re- 
touching, and  added  shadings  to  letters  first  made  with- 
out shading.  8th.  Tremor  on  what  should  be  free  strokes, 
excessive  tremor,  inconsistent  tremor,  tremor  on  finish- 
ing strokes,  omissions  of  natural  tremor.  9th.  Charac- 
ter of  line  or  stroke;  changing  pressure  producing 
bunches  and  unevenness  especially  on  upward  strokes, 
unevenness  due  to  changed  position  of  pen  or  pencil. 
Hesitating  strokes  made  up  of  a  combination  of  short, 
nearly  straight,  controlled  movement  impulses  resulting 
from  a  copying  or  simulating  process.  10th.  Close 
similarity  or  exact  identity  in  repeated  words  or  com- 
binations of  letters,  indicating  that  one  model  was  used 
from  which  to  imitate  or  trace  several  parts,  llth.  Char- 
acter, frequency  and  exact  location  of  all  shadings. 
12th.  Alignment  of  words  and  whole  lines. 

At  some  stage  of  an  inquiry  regarding  the  genuine- 
ness of  a  complete  document  attention  should  be  given, 
as  in  an  anonymous  letter  inquiry,  to  the  general  ques- 
tion of  materials,  including  paper,  pen,  pencil,  ink; 
also  to  composition,  subject  matter,  style,  idioms,  gram- 
mar, spelling,  use  of  capitals,  punctuation,  division  of 
words,  titles,  use  of  numerals  or  words  to  express 
numbers,  corrections,  erasures,  interlineations,  abbrevia- 
tions, folding,  creases,  worn  portions  of  paper,  machine 
cut,  hand  cut  or  torn  edges  of  paper,  size  and  shape  of 
paper  and  water-marks. 

It  is  very  important  that  such  a  document  be  photo- 
graphed with  extreme  care  at  several  different  degrees 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  255 

of  enlargement.  Exposure  and  development  should  be 
exactly  timed  so  that  the  utmost  detail  is  shown  in  the 
lines  or  strokes  themselves.  In  some  cases  such  photo- 
graphs alone,  if  properly  made,  are  sufficient  to  show  the 
fraudulent  character  of  a  complete  forged  paper. 

It  should  of  course  be  understood  that  correct  ex- 
emplification of  these  various  characteristics  as  described 
is  proof  of  genuineness,  and  that  the  process  of  examina- 
tion and  illustration  is  just  the  same  for  the  proof  of 
genuineness  as  for  the  proof  of  forgery.  The  scientific 
examiner  starts  with  no  presumption,  and  looks,  not  for 
facts  to  bolster  up  a  preconceived  theory,  but  for  facts 
upon  which  to  base  a  final  conclusion. 

Questioned  Figures. 

Other  characters  than  script  letters  may  be  questioned 
and  in  such  inquiries  the  same  general  procedure  should 
be  followed  as  has  been  outlined.  The  conventional 
forms  of  figures  are  modified  in  many  different  ways 
by  different  writers,  and  combinations  of  these  modifica- 
tions, as  shown  in  a  sufficient  number  of  figures,  will 
often  point  very  conclusively  to  a  particular  writer. 
As  with  ordinary  writing  the  significance  and  force  of 
such  characteristics  increase  in  geometrical  ratio  so  that 
the  probability  of  exact  coincidence  in  a  combination  of 
numerous  peculiar  characteristics  by  two  different 
writers  is  very  remote.  If  figures  are  few  in  number  or 
conventional  in  form  it  may  be  impossible  to  determine 
their  identity  with  any  great  degree  of  certainty. 

In  an  inquiry  as  to  the  genuineness  of  figures  or  when 
it  is  desired  to  discover  the  actual  writer  of  a  series  or 
group  of  figures  the  steps  as  outlined  in  a  questioned 


256  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

writing  inquiry  should  be  followed,  but  especial  atten- 
tion should  be  given  to  the  following  points :  ( 1 )  Exact 
form,  (2)  direction,  form  and  size  of  beginnings  and 
endings  of  all  figures,  (3)  size  and  proportion  of  figures 
to  each  other  and  of  parts  of  individual  figures,  (4) 
slant  of  figures  and  of  parts,  (5)  alignment  of  figures 
to  each  other  and  to  base  line,  and  horizontal  relation 
of  figures  to  each  other  in  groups  on  unruled  paper, 
(6)  shading  and  location  of  greatest  and  least  pen  pres- 
sure, (7)  method  of  writing  cents  in  amounts  of  money, 
(8)  manner  of  writing  fractions,  (9)  method  of  writing 
figures  in  dates,  (10)  use  of  numerals  instead  of  words 
in  sentences. 

In  connection  with  the  study  of  form  of  figures, 
particular  attention  should  be  given  to  (a)  shape  of 
beginning  stroke  or  loop  and  the  length,  direction  and 
horizontal  position  of  last  stroke  of  figure  2,  (b)  shape 
of  beginning  loop  or  stroke  and  proportion  of  upper 
and  lower  parts  and  direction  and  length  of  last  stroke 
of  figure  3,  (c)  comparative  height  of  two  upper  parts 
of  figure  4  and  also  comparative  slants  of  various  parts 
of  this  figure  and  the  degree  of  elevation  of  horizontal 
stroke  above  base  line  of  writing,  (d)  length,  connection 
or  disconnection,  and  angle  to  base  line  of  upper  hori- 
zontal stroke  of  figure  5  and  looped,  pointed  or  obtuse 
connection  of  strokes  at  center  of  figure,  and  direction 
of  last  stroke,  (e)  degree  of  curvature  and  height  of 
first  stroke  of  figure  6  and  size  and  width  of  opening  of 
concluding  portion,  (f)  beginning  impulse  upward  or 
downward,  compound  curve  or  straight  top  of  figure  7, 
also  length  of  top  compared  with  length  of  figure, 
straightness  or  curvature  of  downward  stroke  and  pro- 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  257 

portion  of  whole  figure  to  portion  extending  below  the 
line,  (g)  figure  8  made  like  capital  S  or  in  opposite 
direction,  proportion  of  upper  and  lower  parts,  length 
and  curvature  of  beginning  stroke  and  of  concluding 
stroke,  (h)  proportions  of  width  to  length  and  direction 
of  beginning  stroke  of  "a"  form  at  top  of  figure  9, 
closed  or  open  top,  length  and  curvature  or  straightness 
of  concluding  stroke  and  degree  of  extension  below  base 
line,  (i)  size  of  naught  in  proportion  to  figures,  circular 
or  elliptical  form,  open  or  closed  top,  finished  with  loop, 
with  acute  angle  connection  or  with  stroke  back  to  left 
at  top  or  to  the  right. 

Comparison  of  Writings. 

A  general  discussion  of  the  question  of  "giving  the 
grounds  of  belief"  in  connection  with  testimony  regard- 
ing documents  is  included  in  a  later  chapter  dealing 
with  several  questions  regarding  a  handwriting  case 
in  court,  but  it  seems  appropriate  to  consider  the  ques- 
tion briefly  at  this  place  in  connection  with  the  subject 
of  comparison. 

In  the  investigation  of  any  questioned  handwriting 
the  final  and  important  part  of  the  process  is  that  of 
comparison,  and  this  is  not  the  simple  operation  that  at 
first  it  may  appear  to  be.  As  the  psychologists  put  it, 
likeness  and  difference  co-exist  in  things  not  utterly 
unlike,  so  that  comparison  for  the  purpose  of  classifica- 
tion, must  include  analysis  and  reasoning1.  The  like- 

1We  go  through  the  world,  carrying  on  the  two  functions  abreast, 
discovering  differences  in  the  like,  and  likenesses  in  the  different.  To 
abstract  the  ground  of  either  difference  or  likeness  (where  it  is  not 
ultimate)  demands  an  analysis  of  the  given  objects  into  their  parts. 
So  that  all  that  was  said  of  the  dependence  of  analysis  upon  a  pre- 
liminary separate  acquaintance  with  the  character  to  be  abstracted, 


258  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ness  may  be  general  and  simply  indicate  the  class  or 
genus,  or  the  difference  may  be  merely  superficial  that 
does  not  differentiate.  Two  American  writings  are 
strikingly  alike  when  compared  with  Arabic  or  Chinese 
writing  but  the  two  American  writings  may  be  funda- 
mentally different  if  compared  to  see  if  they  had  a 
common  origin. 

This  matter  of  analysis  and  reasoning  assumes  special 
importance  in  connection  with  arguments  in  favor  of 
certain  restrictions  of  expert  testimony  when  it  is  asked 
that  the  ruling  be  made  that,  "The  witness  be  allowed 
to  point  out  the  similarities  or  dissimilarities  but  make 
no  comment  thereon."  Such  procedure  tends  to  put  all 
testimony,  good  and  bad,  on  one  dead  level  and  sup- 
presses the  vital  element  in  comparison  which  is  rational 
interpretation  of  likenesses  and  differences1.  The  sensi- 
ble discussion  of  this  subject  by  Professor  Wigmore 

and  upon  its  having  varied  concomitants,  finds  a  place  in  the  psy- 
chology of  resemblance  as  well  as  in  that  of  difference. 

The  perception  of  likeness  is  practically  very  much  bound  up  with 
that  of  difference.  That  is  to  say,  the  only  differences  we  note  as 
differences,  and  estimate  quantitatively,  and  arrange  along  a  scale,  are 
those  comparatively  limited  differences  which  we  find  between  mem- 
bers of  a  common  genus. 

The  same  things,  then,  which  arouse  the  perception  of  difference 
usually  arouse  that  of  resemblance  also.  And  the  analysis  of  them,  so 
as  to  define  wherein  the  difference  and  wherein  the  resemblance 
respectively  consists,  is  called  comparison. — Principles  of  Psychology, 
William  James,  1890;  Vol.  1,  pp.  528,  529. 

1Mr.  Justice  Ward,  of  the  United  States  Circuit  Court,  in  the  case 
of  Newcomb  vs.  Burbank,  tried  in  New  York  City,  October,  1908,  dis- 
cussed the  same  question  as  follows: 

"The  second  class  of  witnesses  are  the  experts,  and  my  own  judg- 
ment is  that  their  testimony  is  extremely  important.  The  ordinary 
man  cannot  tell  in  looking  at  documents  whether  they  are  genuine  or 
not  genuine  with  anything  like  the  degree  of  skill  of  an  expert  who 
is  trained  in  this  business  to  detect  the  characteristics  of  a  writer. 
I  do  not  think  that  the  witnesses,  the  experts  on  one  side  or  the  other 
differ  very  much  about  the  process.  It  is  a  question  of  reasoning  alto- 
gether. .  .  .  Now,  you  have  got  to  give  weight  to  these  experts  in 
proportion  as  you  think  the  reasons  they  give  for  their  opinions  are 
good  reasons  or  bad  reasons." 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  259 

deserves  special  emphasis.  He  says:  "On  the  direct 
examination,  the  witness  may  and,  if  required  must 
point  out  his  grounds  for  belief  in  the  identity  of  the 
handwriting,  on  the  principle  already  considered.  With- 
out such  re-enforcement  of  testimony  the  opinion  of 
experts  would  usually  involve  little  more  than  a  count- 
ing of  the  numbers  on  either  side."-  — Wigmore  on  Evi- 
dence, Vol.  III.,  Sec.  2014  (1904). 

As  we  have  already  seen  in  a  previous  chapter,  to 
reach  the  conclusion  that  two  writings  are  by  the  same 
hand  we  must  find  present  class  characteristics  and  in- 
dividual characteristics  in  sufficient  quantity  to  exclude 
the  theory  of  accidental  coincidence;  to  reach  the  con- 
clusion that  writings  are  by  different  hands  we  may  find 
likeness  in  class  characteristics  and  divergence  in  in- 
dividual characteristics  or  divergence  in  both,  and  the 
divergence  must  be  something  more  than  mere  super- 
ficial or  accidental  difference. 

Some  of  the  old  discussions  of  this  subject  contain 
utterly  fallacious  arguments  to  the  effect  that  similari- 
ties and  differences  have  equal  weight,  which  would 
amount  to  saying  that  an  individual  is  proved  to  be  a 
certain  person  if  certain  similarities  could  be  shown 
without  regard  to  certain  existing  fundamental  differ- 
ences. Such  an  argument  is,  of  course,  absurd.  A 
handwriting  is  identified  exactly  as  a  person  is  identified 
by  a  comparison  of  general  characteristics  that,  in  the 
case  of  a  person,  point  to  a  general  class  or  race,  and  in 
addition  the  identification  must  include  that  which  is 
not  general  but  distinctly  individual  and  personal,  as,  for 
example,  in  a  person  scars,  deformities,  finger  prints,  or 
a  series  of  accurate  measurements. 


260  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  study  of  identity  and  difference,  then,  or  what 
may  be  called  scientific  comparison,  is  observation  com- 
bined with  reasoning.  It  is  not  enough  simply  to  see 
with  bodily  eyes,  but  it  is  necessary  also  to  understand 
and  show  the  real  significance  of  the  thing  seen.  As 
Twistleton  well  says1:  "The  case  is  very  different  in 
the  comparison  of  documents  presented  to  the  eyes  of 
those  who  are  to  judge  respecting  them.  Here  they 
know  both  the  terms  of  the  comparison.  Ultimately, 
their  conclusions  need  not  rest  upon  authority  at  all. 
One  skilled  in  handwriting  may  point  out  coincidences 
in  documents  which  a  volunteer  would  not  have  observed, 
if  the  documents  had  been  in  his  possession  during  a 
long  series  of  years ;  but  those  coincidences  are  outward 
objective  facts,  the  common  property  of  experts  and  of 
volunteers.  If  the  expert  has  skill  in  analyzing  his  own 
impressions,  he  can  go  through  the  proofs  of  every- 
thing which  he  asserts  and  can  make  others  see  what  he 
sees.  If  he  makes  a  mistake,  his  error  admits  of  proof. 
*Hence  the  case  with  which  he  deals,  however  compli- 
cated, becomes  merely  one  of  reasoning,  in  which  in- 
ternal circumstantial  evidence  is  applied  to  demonstrate 
a  disputed  fact." 

Illustrations  of  Simulated  Forgeries. 

Nearly  all  the  preceding  chapters  of  this  book,  it  will 
readily  be  seen,  are  really  introductory  to  the  present 
chapter  on  simulated  forgeries  and  the  two  following 
chapters  on  traced  forgeries  and  anonymous  letters. 
Naturally  the  questions  discussed  in  these  three  chapters 

Handwriting-  of  Junius,  by  Charles  Chabot  and  Hon.  Edward 
Twistleton,  John  Murray,  London,  1871.  With  two  hundred  pages 
of  text  and  two  hundred  and  sixty-seven  pages  of  fac-similes. 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  261 

should  be  studied  in  connection  with  the  illustrations 
and  all  of  the  discussions  on  the  preceding  pages. 

A  large  proportion  of  the  photographs  desirable  for 
the  adequate  illustration  of  these  various  questions  are 
of  large  size,  ranging  in  most  cases  from  8  by  10  to 
11  by  14  inches.  They  must  be  made  so  as  to  show  the 
utmost  detail  of  every  part,  and  it  is  impracticable  to 
illustrate  the  various  questions  in  the  most  effective  man- 
ner on  the  small  pages  of  this  book  by  any  available 
process.  The  accompanying  illustrations  in  this  and 
other  chapters  only  suggest  what  is  possible  when  space 
and  method  are  not  restricted. 

Fig.  107  illustrates  the  extreme  difficulty  of  imitating 
an  unfamiliar  style  of  writing.  The  two  genuine  signa- 
tures, the  first  and  third,  were  the  two  signatures  nearest 
in  date  to  the  disputed  signature. 

The  middle  signature  of  Fig.  108  is  an  alleged  signa- 
ture of  a  man  who  at  the  date  of  the  disputed  writing 
had  great  difficulty  in  writing  as  the  two  genuine  signa- 
tures nearest  in  date  clearly  indicate.  The  disputed 
signature  shows  many  divergencies,  among  others  that 
of  pen  position  which  is  shown  by  the  shading.  In  hesi- 
tation, changing  pen  pressure  and  delicate  tremor,  ex- 
tending to  its  very  extremity,  the  disputed  signature 
shows  every  characteristic  of  a  drawing  movement.  A 
part  of  this  signature  is  illustrated  in  the  chapter  on 
movement  in  Fig.  58. 

The  first  signature  in  Fig.  109  is  a  typical  example 
of  suspicious  line  quality.  The  second  signature  is  the 
nearest  in  point  of  time  after  the  date  of  the  disputed 
signature  and  shows  the  freedom  and  force  which  are 
always  characteristic  of  genuineness.  The  disputed 


262  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

signature  was  probably  produced  by  a  combination  of 
the  copying  and  tracing  processes  and  a  brief  examina- 
tion even  of  the  small  half-tone  cut  will  disclose  the  basis 
for  the  emphatic  finding  of  the  court  that:  "A  mere 
inspection  of  this  signature  will  satisfy  the  most  care- 
less observer  that  it  needs  an  explanation  and  when  the 
signature  is  analyzed  and  the  proper  tests  applied  this 
explanation  becomes  imperative."  In  an  able  decision, 
Matter  of  Burtis,  43  (N.  Y.)  Miscellaneous  Reports, 
the  court  decided  the  signature  to  be  a  forgery. 

Figs.  110  and  111  are  illustrations  of  the  cumulative 
force  of  repeated  examples  of  similar  minor  divergencies. 
These  illustrations,  like  Fig.  56,  show  the  extreme  dif- 
ficulty of  simulating  a  whole  document  with  the  natural 
variation  of  genuine  writing. 


FIG.  107 — Imitation  (middle  signature)  of  the  old    Round   Hand  writing. 
Observe   divergence   in   shading,    angularity   and  spacing,    and   also   in 
curvature   of  capital  J.     Part   of  the   signature  showed  a  very  sus- 
picious pencil  underwriting.    Matter  of  Van  Deventer  Estate,  Penn 
Yan,  N.  Y.    Part  of  this  disputed  signature  is  shown  in  Fig.  59. 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES  263 


S  Vf>w'GHN  3T.N.V 


FIG.  108 — Two  genuine  signatures  and  a  disputed  signature  in  the  Matter  of  the 
John  Hyland  Estate,  Dansville,  N.  Y. 


FIG.   109— Disputed  and  genuine  signatures  in  Matter  of  Burtis,  Auburn,   N.  Y. 


264 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  1 10 — Concluding  letters  from  words  in  a  disputed  docu- 
ment on  the  left  and  a  genuine  letter  on  the  right  taken 
in  order  as  they  appear.     Observe  differences  in 
design,  slant,  position,  variation,  and  care. 
From  exhibit  in  case  of  W.   D.   Parr 
vs.   Executors  of  D.  G.  Parr  Es- 
tate, Louisville,  Ky.,    (1908). 


SIMULATED  OR  COPIED  FORGERIES 


265 


FIG.  Ill  —  Disputed  and  standard  initial  letters  juxtaposed  to  illustrate  the  cumu- 
lative force  of  repeated  slight  divergence.     Observe  curvature  in  down 
stroke  of  s  and  beginning  and  shape  of  y.     From  exhibit  in 
case  of  Newcomb  vs.  Burbank  (1909),  New  York  City. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

TRACED  FORGERIES 

A  traced  forgery  is  the  result  of  an  attempt  to  trans- 
fer to  a  fraudulent  document  an  exact  fac-simile  of  a 
genuine  writing  by  some  tracing  process.  A  forged 
writing  of  this  kind  is  usually  a  poor  piece  of  work  and 
of  the  various  classes  of  forgery  is  one  of  the  easiest  to 
detect.  The  selection  of  the  tracing  method  seems  to  be 
a  confession  by  the  operator  that  he  does  not  possess 
the  skill  necessary  to  write  an  imitation  and  employs 
this  process  only  as  a  makeshift.  As  we  have  seen,  a 
simulated  forgery  is  an  imitation  of  the  general  features 
of  a  genuine  writing  but  does  not  aim  to  be  an  exact 
duplicate  in  size  and  proportions,  while  a  traced  forgery 
is  intended  to  reproduce  not  only  the  form  but  also  the 
size,  proportions  and  relations  of  all  parts  of  the  original, 
the  exact  detail  of  each  line,  stroke,  and  dot  being  fol- 
lowed as  closely  as  the  method  employed  and  the  skill 
of  the  operator  will  permit1. 

No  positive  line  of  distinction  that  will  apply  in  all 
cases  can  be  drawn  between  these  two  classes  of  forgery. 
Many  of  the  defects  of  simulated  writing  are  the  same 
as  those  in  traced  writing,  and  a  tracing,  through  lack 
of  skill  or  care,  may  diverge  more  from  the  model  than 


*In  numerous  ways  the  method  of  procedure  is  the  same  in  the  ex- 
amination of  alleged  traced  forgeries,  of  alleged  simulated  forgeries, 
and  of  anonymous  letters.  It  has  seemed  best  to  treat  the  three  sub- 
jects separately,  but  the  three  chapters  should  all  be  consulted  in  con- 
nection with  the  investigation  of  any  one  of  the  three  subjects. 

[266] 


TRACED  FORGERIES  267 

a  skillful  freehand  simulation.  The  only  positive  evi- 
dence that  a  writing  is  a  tracing  is  the  discovery  of  the 
actual  model  from  which  it  was  made,  or  the  discovery 
of  two  or  more  identical  companion  forgeries  which 
could  only  have  been  made  from  one  original.  Numer- 
ous divergencies  in  form  are  evidence  that  a  disputed 
writing  was  not  produced  by  the  tracing  process. 

Traced  forgeries  usually  show  hesitation,  abnormal 
changes  of  direction,  inconsistent  pen  pressure  and  un- 
natural movement  interruptions  in  a  more  pronounced 
manner  than  simulated  forgeries,  but  this  again  depends 
upon  the  specific  process  employed  and  the  skill  of  the 
operator.  It  is  natural  that  the  model  from  which  a 
traced  forgery  was  actually  made  should  not  be  dis- 
covered, and  the  true  character  of  such  a  disputed  signa- 
ture must  ordinarily  be  determined  by  an  examination 
of  the  signature  itself  and  by  a  comparison  of  it  with 
genuine  signatures.  Strange  as  it  may  seem,  however, 
in  many  important  cases  the  model  writing  is  actually 
put  in  the  case  to  prove  the  forged  writing  to  be  genuine 
by  means  of  it.  The  reason  for  such  strange  action 
seems  to  be  the  thought  that  a  genuine  writing  so  like 
the  disputed  signature  will  undoubtedly  prove  the  dis- 
puted, signature  to  be  genuine.  Traced  forgeries  are 
often  passed  as  genuine  by  those  who  depend  alone  on 
form  or,  as  it  is  vaguely  described,  on  the  "general 
character"  of  the  writing.  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  in  a  tracing  the  outlines  of  the  letters  will  conform 
quite  closely  to  the  particular  genuine  writing  imitated 
and  it  is  also  evident  that  the  spurious  character  of  the 
writing  must  be  mainly  determined  by  other  than  diverg- 
ence in  form  characteristics. 


268  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

A  traced  forgery  will  probably  be  defective  in  one  or 
more  of  the  following  named  particulars:  1,  Natural 
movement,  freedom  and  speed  of  writing.  2,  Quality 
of  line  or  stroke.  3,  Pen  lifts,  retouching  and  shading. 
4,  Selection  and  date  of  model  writing.  5,  Pencil  out- 
lines or  indentations  pointing  to  a  tracing  process.  6, 
Identity  of  the  writing  with  a  genuine  model  or  identity 
of  two  or  more  disputed  writings. 

A  brief  examination  of  the  tracing  process  will  show 
that  it  is  impossible  by  this  method  to  produce  a  writing 
with  a  natural  writing  movement.  If  an  accurate  imi- 
tation of  a  writing  could  thus  be  executed  no  one  could 
detect  it  as  not  genuine  because  it  would  be  practically 
the  writing  imitated.  A  successful  forgery,  however, 
must  reproduce  not  only  the  form — which  is  the  only 
imitation  usually  attempted — but  also  in  some  reasonable 
degree  must  follow  the  style  of  movement  employed, 
the  speed,  pen  position,  pen  pressure,  and  other  char- 
acteristic habits  of  the  writer  whose  writing  is  being 
imitated,  and  on  some  of  these  vital  points  the  traced 
forgery  is  almost  certain  to  fail;  in  short,  natural,  free, 
unconscious  writing  cannot  be  produced  by  the  tracing 
process1.  It  is  very  difficult  if  not  impossible  to  trace 


JIn  forgeries  perpetrated  by  the  aid  of  tracing-,  the  internal  evi- 
dence is  more  or  less  conclusive  according  to  the  skill  of  the  forger.  In 
the  perpetration  of  a  forgery  the  mind,  instead  of  being  occupied  in 
the  usual  function  of  supplying  matter  to  be  recorded,  devotes  its 
special  attention  to  the  superintendence  of  the  hand,  directing  its 
movements,  so  that  the  hand  no  longer  glides  naturally  and  automati- 
cally over  the  paper,  but  moves  slowly  with  a  halting,  vacillating 
motion,  as  the  eye  passes  to  and  from  the  copy  to  the  pen,  moving 
under  the  specific  control  of  the  will.  Evidence  of  such  a  forgery  is 
manifest  in  the  formal,  broken,  nervous  lines,  the  uneven  flow  of  the 
ink,  and  the  often  retouched  lines  and  shades.  These  evidences  are 
unmistakable  when  studied  with  the  aid  of  the  microscope. — Criminal 
Investigation,  by  Dr.  Hans  Gross,  (Berlin)  Trans,  by  J.  and  J.  C.  Adam, 
p.  246  (1906). 


TRACED  FORGERIES  269 

even  one's  own  signature  and  produce  a  good  result  for 
the  reason  that  the  method  itself  necessarily  interferes 
with  the  natural  writing  movement.  In  tracing  a  genuine 
writing  which  contains  numerous  free  and  smooth 
strokes  there  undoubtedly  will  be  shown  in  the  result  a 
hesitation  inconsistent  with  genuineness;  and  a  tracing 
by  a  strong  hand  of  a  very  weak  and  decrepit  original 
will  undoubtedly  be  inconsistent  with  it  in  many  ways. 

The  line  quality  of  a  traced  forgery,  the  second  point 
to  be  considered,  is  almost  certain  to  be  defective.  A 
fraudulent  tracing  may  conform  with  great  accuracy  to 
the  particular  model  from  which  it  was  made  but  usually 
its  unnatural  line  quality  alone  (see  Figs.  53,  54)  is 
sufficient  to  mark  it  as  not  genuine.  In  many  cases 
this  conclusion  can  even  be  reached  without  comparison 
with  any  genuine  writing  whatever  and  simply  from  a 
study  of  the  questioned  writing  itself,  especially  when 
shown  in  an  enlarged  photograph.  The  question  of  line 
quality  and  movement  as  affected  by  an  unnatural 
method  of  writing  is  discussed  more  at  length  in  preced- 
ing chapters  devoted  to  these  questions  to  which  refer- 
ence is  made. 

Under  the  third  division  of  probable  defects  in  traced 
forgeries,  or  that  of  pen  lifts,  retouching  and  defective 
shading,  it  is  necessary  to  discuss  somewhat  at  length 
certain  important  phases  of  the  subject  relating  not  only 
to  traced  forgeries  but  to  simulated  forgeries  as  well. 
Experience  shows  that  by  whatever  method  a  fraudulent 
writing  is  produced  it  is  not  as  a  rule  entirely  satisfac- 
tory in  every  particular  as  first  written,  and  effort  is 
made  to  improve  it  by  patching  and  strengthening  vari- 
ous parts.  The  nervous  anxiety  to  do  the  work  well 


270  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

and  the  unnatural  concentration  of  the  mind  on  the  act 
of  tracing  a  criminal  forgery  seem  to  make  it  almost 
impossible  to  let  the  fraudulent  thing  alone  after  it  is 
once  written.  The  tracing  process  necessarily  gives  at- 
tention almost  exclusively  to  the  form,  and  often  shows 
conspicuous  hesitation  and  tremulousness  in  the  finer 
lines  and  may  entirely  omit  strong,  characteristic  shad- 
ings  which  are  afterwards  carefully  added.  Pen  lifts 
may  be  covered  up,  wavering  lines  strengthened,  gaps 
filled  in,  unimportant  strokes  extended,  and  even  flour- 
ishes carefully  added  to  a  signature  which  as  first  writ- 
ten may  have  been  good  enough  to  pass  as  genuine. 

It  may  be  very  difficult  to  show  the  fraudulent  char- 
acter of  a  small  amount  of  pencil  writing  produced  by 
the  tracing  process  if  the  tracing  was  skillfully  made 
and  was  not  afterwards  retouched.  This  is  true  for  the 
reason  that  pencil  writing  does  not  show  line  quality, 
hesitation,  pen  lifts  and  disconnections  as  clearly  as  pen 
writing.  Experience  shows,  however,  that  fraudulent 
pencil  writing  is  usually  retouched  and  overwritten  in 
such  a  suspicious  manner  that  its  true  character  may 
thus  be  conclusively  shown.  The  ease  with  which  such 
corrections  are  made  in  pencil  writing  seems  to  create 
the  temptation  to  do  too  much.  Comparatively  few  im- 
portant disputed  documents  are  pencil- written,  however, 
for  the  reason  that  such  a  writing  is  suspicious  in  itself 
and  calls  for  an  adequate  explanation. 

For  various  reasons  genuine  writing  is  sometimes  re- 
touched, and  with  a  few  writers  retouching  is  a  peculiar 
habit,  and  thus  it  becomes  necessary  to  distinguish  that 
which  is  genuine  from  that  which  is  fraudulent.  Natural 
retouching  is  usually  done  for  the  perfectly  evident  pur- 


TRACED  FORGERIES  271 

pose  of  correcting  a  palpable  defect  or  supplying  a  part 
necessary  to  the  form  and  legibility;  such  retouching  is 
usually  perfectly  apparent  and  is  made  with  one  or  two 
free,  bold  strokes.  Fraudulent  retouching,  however,  is 
more  delicately  and  carefully  done  and  often  shows  the 
evident  intention  of  concealing  the  operation,  and  it  may 
be  the  result  of  many  delicate  touches  of  the  pen  to  the 
paper  at  different  points.  This  condition  in  a  writing, 
to  say  the  least,  is  very  suspicious  and  must  be  inter- 
preted in  a  different  manner  from  the  plain  open  correc- 
tion or  remaking  of  a  stroke  where  the  ink  was  ex- 
hausted and  the  pen  failed  to  write,  or  where  it  is  per- 
fectly evident  that  a  part  or  the  whole  of  a  wrong  letter 
was  first  made  and  the  correct  letter  or  stroke  was  after- 
wards made  over  it1. 

The  location  of  the  retouching  on  a  writing  is  a  matter 
that  should  always  be  carefully  considered  and  may 
indicate  its  suspicious  character;  the  attempt  to  improve 
unimportant  parts  is  always  suspicious  but  particularly 
so  if  such  parts  are  not  necessary  to  the  legibility.  The 


:Ink  will  sometimes  flow  back  on  a  stroke  from  a  shaded  to  an 
unshaded  portion,  giving  the  appearance  of  two  ink  films,  the  lower 
one  apparently  much  lighter  than  the  upper  and  the  stroke  showing  a 
distinct  contrast  where  the  two  parts  come  together.  The  inexperienced 
may  conclude  that  this  phenomenon  shows  a  retouching  of  the  writing. 
The  condition  as  described  is  most  frequently  shown  at  the  tops  of 
strokes  where  a  lighter  film  of  ink  apparently  extends  out  beyond  the 
main  heavy  stroke.  Logwood  ink  that  has  slightly  gelatinized  and 
some  kinds  of  thin  ink  will  show  this  peculiar  characteristic.  Such  a 
flowing  back  of  ink  on  a  stroke  will  not  be  mistaken  for  a  retouching 
if  carefully  examined.  The  ink  flows  back  because  attracted  by  the 
still  damp  but  unshaded  line  immediately  preceding  the  heavier 
deposit  of  ink  and  always  covers  the  exact  width  of  the  lighter  line, 
showing  a  smoothness  and  uniformity  of  distribution  that  distinguishes 
it  from  a  retouching.  A  natural  flow-back  also  appears  in  connection 
with  a  shading  or  heavier  deposit  of  ink  immediately  following  a  lighter 
line,  and  never  in  the  middle  of  a  stroke.  A  retouching  may  appear 
anywhere  and  almost  certainly  will  show  under  proper  magnification 
certain  ragged  irregularities  or  violent  contrasts  that  are  unmistakable. 


272  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

last  stroke  of  the  signature  and  the  last  stroke  of  each 
of  the  separated  parts  of  the  signature  should  be  ex- 
amined with  special  care.  A  retouching  of  an  unim- 
portant final  stroke,  an  unnecessary  flourish  or  a  "t" 
crossing  is  sometimes  very  strong  evidence  of  fraud. 
Retouched  writing  may  sometimes  show  apparent  shad- 
ings  even  on  upward  strokes  (see  Fig.  54)  where  such 
shading  would  be  impossible  in  natural,  genuine  writing. 

Another  thing  to  be  considered  in  making  an  exam- 
ination of  retouched  writing  is  the  fact  that  if  ordinary 
fluid  ink  were  used  such  retouching  may  be  much  more 
apparent  after  a  lapse  of  time  than  when  first  made. 
By  reason  of  the  darkening  of  the  ink,  retouching  may 
eventually  become  so  perfectly  apparent  that  it  may 
seem  unreasonable  that  it  would  have  been  made  in  the 
first  place,  but  it  should  be  remembered  that  with  the 
strokes  of  the  color  and  strength  as  shown  when  first 
made  such  changes  could  not  then  have  been  seen  by 
ordinary  observation.  If,  as  sometimes  occurs,  the  re- 
touching is  actually  done  with  ink  different  in  kind  but 
similar  in  color  to  the  ink  of  the  first  writing,  but  which 
changes  and  grows  black  by  age  while  the  original  writ- 
ing does  not  change,  then  such  changes  are,  as  they  final- 
ly appear,  still  more  suspicious  because  this  condition 
would  indicate  that  at  some  time  after  a  first  writing  was 
originally  written  an  effort  was  made  to  improve  and 
perfect  it. 

Suspicious  pen  lifts  or  disconnections  should  always 
be  looked  for  in  a  writing  that  may  have  been  produced 
by  either  the  simulating  or  tracing  method.  The  neces- 
sity of  looking  at  the  copy  in  a  simulated  writing  or  of 
clearly  seeing  the  dim  outline  in  a  traced  forgery  may 


TRACED  FORGERIES  273 

make  it  necessary  to  take  off  the  pen.  This  may  be 
done  at  any  point  and  not  where  the  pen  would  naturally 
be  raised.  It  is  particularly  important  that  broken  lines 
of  this  character  should  be  looked  for  in  a  suspected 
pencil  writing,  and  any  forgery  may  show  stops  and  dis- 
connections where  they  should  not  appear1. 

The  fourth  defect  possible  in  a  traced  forgery,  as 
outlined  above,  is  in  the  choice  of  a  model.  Many  writers 
are  not  aware  of  the  fact  that  even  a  few  years,  especial- 
ly writh  those  of  advanced  age,  may  make  a  great  change 
in  a  handwriting  and  one  who  sets  about  making  a  trac- 
ing may  select  a  model  writing  of  the  wrong  date.  It  is 
often  assumed  that  any  genuine  writing  is  good  enough 
and  a  model  may  be  taken  that  was  written  twenty  years 
or  more  before  or  after  the  date  of  the  questioned  writ- 
ing. In  every  case  of  this  kind  a  chronological  study 
should  be  made  of  the  standard  writing,  any  changes 
should  be  carefully  noted  and  their  application  to  the 
investigation  in  hand  carefully  considered. 

The  fifth  possible  defect  in  a  traced  forgery  is  any 
condition  in  the  alleged  traced  writing  or  the  alleged 
model  that  points  to  the  tracing  process.  The  model  or 
the  tracing,  when  clean  and  fresh  as  first  brought  for- 
ward, may  show  indentations  resulting  from  the  mak- 
ing of  an  outline  with  a  sharp  instrument  of  some  kind ; 
the  tracing  may  show  suspicious  remains  of  a  pencil  out- 
line, or  the  ink  of  the  suspected  writing  may  be  rubbed 
or  worn  away  by  the  erasure  of  a  previously  made  pencil 

Retouched  writing  and  pen  lifts  should  be  examined  under  dif- 
ferent degrees  of  magnification  by  both  direct  and  transmitted  light 
and  should  be  accurately  photographed  in  enlarged  form.  Transmitted 
light  photographs  enlarged  from  two  to  four  diameters  or  direct  light 
photographs  enlarged  from  three  to  ten  diameters,  as  the  conditions  re- 
quire, will  usually  show  retouching  so  plainly  that  it  cannot  be  denied. 


274  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

or  carbon  outline.  The  possible  existence  of  conditions 
of  this  kind  shows  the  importance  of  an  early  and 
thorough  examination  of  such  a  writing  by  a  competent 
examiner  before  it  is  handled,  soiled  or  experimented 
with  in  such  a  way  as  permanently  to  impair  its  evi- 
dential value  in  these  particulars.  In  the  case  of  Day 
vs.  Cole,  referred  to  in  a  footnote  and  illustrated  on  a 
following  page,  an  indentation  on  the  model  writing 
had  a  very  important  bearing  on  the  investigation.  In 
the  Boyer  case  (Fig.  51)  parts  of  the  ink  strokes  had 
been  carried  away  in  erasing  the  pencil  outline. 

The  sixth  possible  basis  of  attack  upon  a  traced 
forgery,  and  perhaps  the  most  important  of  all,  is  its 
identity  with  a  model  present  in  the  case,  or  the  sus- 
picious similarity  of  two  or  more  questioned  signatures. 
The  underlying  principle  upon  which  identity  is  con- 
sidered an  indication  of  forgery  is  that  a  large  number 
of  rare  events  will  not  all  accidentally  coincide  and  if 
they  are  actually  combined  then  such  result  must  be  due 
to  design  and  not  to  accident1.  In  an  argument  of  coun- 
sel in  an  important  case,  a  picturesque  illustration  of  the 


lrThe  courts  have  spoken  but  few  times  on  the  subject  of  identity  as 
proof  of  forgery  and  it  is  interesting  to  examine  a  few  brief  excerpts. 
One  of  the  latest  utterances  is  in  the  celebrated  Rice-Patrick  will  case, 
New  York  City  (Matter  of  Rice,  81  Appellate  Division,  (N.  Y.)  223, 
1903,  in  which  the  Honorable  Surrogate,  the  Appellate  Division  and 
the  New  York  Court  of  Appeals  were  unanimous  in  the  finding  of 
forgery.  Whatever  the  merits  of  Patrick's  appeal  on  the  murder 
charge  these  courts  all  practically  convicted  him  of  forgery  by  declar- 
ing his  will  was  not  genuine.  The  Appellate  court  in  this  case  said: 

"Upon  a  critical  examination  of  these  four  signatures  it  will  be  found 
that  they  correspond  almost  exactly, — a  coincidence  which  could  not 
possibly  happen  in  the  case  of  four  genuine  signatures  of  a  person  up- 
ward of  eighty  years  of  age.  .  .  In  other  words,  each  signature 
will,  when  superimposed,  show  a  similarity  which  does  not  appear  in 
the  concededly  genuine  signatures  introduced  in  evidence,  and  which, 
from  the  very  nature  of  things,  could  not  occur.  This  fact  taken  in 
connection  with  the  other  evidence  bearing  upon  the  subject,  is  of 
such  a  character  as  to  irresistibly  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  had  the 


TRACED  FORGERIES  275 

principle  was  given  as  follows:  "It  has  been  said  that 
if  a  person  meet  in  a  waste  place  three  trees  growing  in 
a  row,  he  thinks  they  were  so  planted  hy  man;  should 
he  find  the  distances  equal,  he  is  convinced.  Such  acci- 
dental situation  of  thirty  trees  would  not  exceed  in 
strangeness  a  coincidence  like  the  one  in  this  case."2 

A  brief  examination  of  the  writing  process  clearly 
shows  that  every  time  even  one  short  name  is  written 
there  is  possibility  of  slight  divergence  and  variation  in 
every  direction  of  every  part  of  every  stroke  in  size, 
position,  proportions  and  relations  of  all  parts,  and  a  few 
simple  experiments  will  demonstrate  how  impossible  it 


testimony  which  was  stricken  out  remained  in,  the  Surrogate's  con- 
clusion would  have  been  the  same.  .  ." 

In  Matter  of  Burtis,  43  Misc.  (N.  Y.)  Reports,  437,  (1904),  the 
Court  says: 

"I  refer  to  the  physical  evidence  furnished  by  the  disputed  signa- 
ture itself.  A  mere  inspection  of  this  signature  will  satisfy  the  most 
careless  observer  that  it  needs  an  explanation,  and  when  the  signature 
is  analyzed  and  the  proper  tests  applied  this  explanation  becomes  im- 
perative. .  .  True,  there  are  slight  departures  occasionally  from  the 
model  but  these  variations  are  only  in  the  detail  of  certain  lines — the 
whole  of  the  disputed  signature  being  structurally  the  same  as  the 
other  and  occupying  the  same  physical  field.  Indeed  it  may  fairly  be 
said  that  these  very  departures  tend  to  indicate  the  process  which 
has  produced  the  signature,  for  it  will  be  noticed  that  after  each 
departure,  the  line  of  the  disputed  signature  immediately  returns  to 
the  line  of  the  model, — showing  conclusively,  as  I  think,  that  there 
was  a  model  which  was  steadily  operating  as  a  guide  to  the  writer's 
hand.  This  coincidence  of  a  disputed  signature  with  a  genuine  one 
when  superimposed  against  the  light  has  long  been  held  by  the  courts 
to  be  proof  of  simulation." 

The  learned  Surrogate  in  Matter  of  Koch,  33  (N.  Y.)  Misc.  Re- 
ports, 153,  (1900)  N.  Y.,  says:  "There  is  not  the  slightest  deviation 
except  such  as  might  and  naturally  would  occur  if  both  signatures 
were  tracings  from  the  same  standard. 

The  opinion  in  Hunt  vs.  Lawless,  7  Abbott's  New  Cases,  113  (1879), 
puts  the  matter  as  follows:  "Where  two  or  more  supposed  signatures 
are  found  to  be  counterparts  I  think  the  simulation  is  detected  by 
that  circumstance.  Genuine  signatures  will  not  lap  with  perfect  sim- 
ilarity over  one  another.  .  .  But  a  close  examination  shows  that 

2From  an  argument  by  T.  M.  Stetson,  Esq.,  counsel  for  Respondents 
in  Robinson  vs.  Mandell  (Sylvia  Ann  Howland  Case),  New  Bedford, 
Mass.,  1867. 


276  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

is  to  write  two  signatures  precisely  alike  so  that  the  path 
of  the  pen  throughout  is  exactly  identical  in  both  cases. 
A  line,  as  we  have  learned,  is  the  path  of  a  moving  point, 
and  exact  repetition  would  require  that  at  the  second 
writing  the  pen  should  exactly  hit  a  thousand  or  more 
selected  but  invisible  points.  The  degree  of  similarity 
in  writing  will  naturally  depend  upon  the  skill  of  the 
writer,  the  length  of  the  signature,  the  number  of  de- 
tached parts  it  contains,  the  width  of  the  strokes  and 
some  other  possible  conditions.  By  comparing  a  great 

the  signature  of  Exhibit  9  is  identical  with  that  to  the  above  named 
receipt  and  with  those  to  Schedules  A  and  B.  It  would  require  a 
vast  amount  of  credulity  to  suppose  that  those  four  signatures  can  all 
be  genuine  and  yet  all  of  them  lap  over  another  so  that  the  whole  are 
identical.  One  of  them  is  probably  genuine,  the  others  traced;  or, 
perhaps  all  four  are  traced.  .  .  Did  ever  any  man  sign  his  name 
four  times  with  such  invariable  uniformity?  All  experience  testifies 
to  the  absurdity  of  the  supposition  that  he  did." 

In  the  case  of  Day  vs.  Cole,  65  Mich.  129  (1887),  the  question  is 
discussed  as  follows:  "I  am  satisfied  the  signature  is  a  forgery.  All 
the  facts  seem  to  point  in  that  direction;  but  the  one  thing  that  fastens 
conviction  upon  my  mind  above  all  others  is  this:  These  two  signa- 
tures are  too  evenly  alike  to  be  both  genuine.  .  .  Such  a  perfect 
coincidence  as  in  the  case  of  these  two  signatures  in  this  cause  is  at 
least  highly  improbable,  and  but  barely  possible,  if  attainable  at  all. 

"There  is  in  my  mind  but  one  explanation  of  this  remarkable  and 
striking  similarity;  and  that  is  that,  while  Exhibit  128  was  in  the 
hands  of  Cole,  this  signature  to  the  assignment  was  copied  and  manu- 
factured therefrom  by  some  one.  And  I  am  satisfied  it  was  done  by 
tracing  and  outlining  so  that  virtually,  with  some  slight  inaccuracies, 
the  signature  upon  128  was  transferred  to  the  assignment.  There  is 
too  much  method  shown  in  the  latter  signature,  and  this  method  has 
exposed,  to  my  mind,  that  it  is  not  the  genuine  signature  of  a  business 
man,  like  Gardner,  writing  in  a  hurry,  and  without  thought  of  the 
manner  of  making  or  the  form  of  such  signature,  but  the  cunning 
imitation  of  a  forger,  whose  cunning  has  yet  been  the  means  of  detect- 
ing the  forgery." 

In  the  case  of  Fox  vs.  McDonogh's  Succession,  18  La.  448  (1866), 
the  opinion  of  the  court  says:  "The  remarkable  and  almost  exact 
sameness  of  the  size,  form  and  position  of  each  letter,  line  and  flourish 
or  dash  in  the  space  occupied  by  the  signature  to  the  propounded 
codicil;  and  that  to  the  lease  of  November  1st,  1846,  obtained  from 
Fernandez,  renders  it  not  only  possible,  but  probable,  that  the  former 
was  traced  from  the  latter." 

The  editor  of  Abbott's'Trial  Brief,  Second  Edition,  p.  400,  in  speak- 
ing of  identity  as  proof  of  forgery  says:  "It  seems  that  such  proof 
is  conclusive  and  would  require  instruction  to  the  jury  to  that  effect." 


TRACED  FORGERIES  277 

number  of  signatures  of  a  free,  skillful  and  uniform 
writer,  there  can  be  found  some  closely  resembling  each 
other,  but  even  with  such  an  exceptional  writer  exact 
identity  is  extremely  improbable. 

In  the  famous  Howland  case,  illustrated  herewith, 
Professor  Benjamin  Pierce,  the  celebrated  mathemati- 
cian of  Harvard  University,  testified  that  the  probability 
of  identical  coincidence  of  all  the  thirty  downward 
strokes  of  the  long  "Sylvia  Ann  Howland"  signature 
with  the  same  strokes  of  a  second  signature  must  be 
represented  by  the  fraction  with  one  for  a  numerator 
and  the  thirtieth  power  of  five  for  a  denominator1. 
Exact  coincidence  in  writing  is  enormously  more  im- 
probable than  it  is  generally  thought  to  be.  This  phase 
of  the  subject  of  traced  forgeries  is  governed  by  the 
same  principles  that  were  discussed  in  the  chapter  treat- 


1This  case  has  been  incorrectly  reported  in  nearly  every  reference 
to  it  in  the  decisions,  the  text-books  and  magazine  articles  even  up 
to  the  year  1909.  In  the  first  place  the  thirtieth  power  of  five  is  not 
as  reported  2,666  followed  by  eighteen  ciphers  but  is  931  followed  by 
eighteen  figures,  or  upwards  of  nine  hundred  and  thirty-one  quintil- 
lions  (931,000,000,000,000,000,000).  The  difference  in  the  numbers 
makes  no  practical  difference,  as  the  least  is  entirely  beyond  human 
comprehension.  This  strange  error  is  in  the  original  report  of  the  case 
and  has  been  repeated  from  that  time.  No  doubt  some  change  was 
made  in  the  basis  of  the  calculation  without  making  the  resulting 
change  in  the  result. 

Another  error  that  has  been  repeated  many  times  is  the  statement 
that  Professor  Pierce  testified  that  "No  two  signatures  will  be  identical, 
etc.,"  but  his  testimony  applied  only  to  the  signatures  "No.  1"  and 
"No.  10"  in  this  particular  case.  The  magazine  article,  4  American 
Law  Review,  printed  shortly  after  the  trial,  is  full  of  errors  and  ap- 
parently reflected  the  views  of  a  partisan  in  the  case.  The  testimony 
in  full  and  a  most  interesting  and  valuable  verbatim  report  of  the 
arguments  of  counsel  in  the  case  and  also  photographs  of  the  writings 
are  on  file  at  the  Public  Library  at  New  Bedford,  Mass. 

This  famous  case  was  finally  decided  on  a  point  of  law  and  the 
facts  were  never  passed  upon  by  court  and  jury.  Considerable  interest 
is  added  to  the  case  by  a  knowledge  of  the  fact  tnat  the  claimant, 
"Hetty  Robinson,"  afterwards  married  a  Mr.  Green,  of  New  York,  and 
has  been  known  for  many  years,  especially  to  the  financial  world,  as 
"Hetty  Green,"  of  New  York  city. 


278  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ing   of   mathematical   calculation   applied   to   writing. 

Although,  as  has  been  said,  it  is  not  necessary  that  a 
model  writing  or  an  identical  companion  forgery  be 
found  in  every  instance  in  order  to  show  that  a  traced 
writing  is  undoubtedly  spurious,  the  finding  of  such  a 
model,  showing  marked  and  significant  identities,  or  the 
discovery  of  two  or  more  questioned  signatures  that 
resemble  each  other  in  a  suspicious  manner  and  at  the 
same  time  bear  in  themselves  the  inherent  evidences  of 
fraud  which  writing  shows  when  produced  by  a  tracing 
method,  affords  the  strongest  kind  of  additional  proof 
that  the  writing  is  a  forgery.  Close  similarity  of  a  sus- 
pected signature  to  a  possible  model  in  design,  size, 
proportions  and  position  is  always  a  suspicious  circum- 
stance especially  if  the  resemblance  is  very  close,  like  a 
rubber  stamp  impression,  or  includes  and  reproduces 
accidental  or  unusual  features  in  the  model  signature. 
Under  these  last  named  conditions  the  identity  alone 
may  be  very  strong  evidence  of  forgery. 

A  fact  that  should  always  be  considered  in  such  an 
inquiry  is  that  even  a  traced  forgery  will  not  be  a  mathe- 
matically exact  reproduction  of  the  model  from  which 
it  is  made.  Even  if  the  forger  has  the  rare  skill  required 
to  draw  such  a  copy  the  natural  tendency  seems  to  be 
to  attempt  to  improve  the  model  more  or  less,  which 
obviously  would  lead  to  divergence;  and,  in  some  rare 
instances,  divergence  in  size  or  position  is  undoubtedly 
intentional.  Ordinary  unshaded  pen  marks  are  only 
from  about  one-fiftieth  to  one-two  hundredth  of  an  inch 
in  width  and  under  usual  conditions  it  would  be  physical- 
ly impossible  to  reproduce  with  absolute  accuracy  all 
these  fine  lines  of  a  signature  by  the  tracing  process. 


TRACED  FORGERIES  279 

These  divergencies  are  due  to  various  causes,  among 
which  are  nervous  strain  induced  by  a  realization  of  the 
criminal  act  being  performed  and  the  intense  desire  to 
do  it  well,  lack  of  muscular  skill,  and  especially  inability 
to  see  clearly  the  line  of  the  model  which  is  being  fol- 
lowed, particularly  if  the  tracing  is  being  made  by  one 
operation  direct  from  the  model  by  following  the  lines 
as  seen  through  the  paper1. 

The  tracing  will  also  be  likely  to  differ  slightly  from 
the  model  because  of  the  almost  uncontrollable  tendency 
in  imitating  writing  by  any  process,  to  incorporate  even 
in  a  tracing  some  of  one's  own  writing  habits.  Slight 
divergence  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  the  paper  on 
which  a  forged  writing  is  being  traced  was  accidentally 
moved  during  the  process,  especially  in  case  the  signa- 
ture is  made  up  of  several  detached  names  or  parts.  A 
tracing  may  also  differ  slightly  from  the  model  because 
the  traced  lines  of  the  copy  may  not  quite  reach  the  ends 
of  strokes  of  the  model  or  may  go  slightly  beyond  the 
extremities  of  the  dim  outlines  which  are  being  followed 
as  seen  through  the  paper. 

Divergence  from  the  model  in  a  traced  forgery  as  in 
a  simulated  forgery  also  tends  to  make  the  letters  more 
formal  and  perfect  in  shape  than  the  genuine  writing 


1When  alleged  forgeries  are  associated  with  a  genuine  signature 
from  which  they  may  have  been  traced,  comparisons  by  transmitted 
light  as  to  design,  size,  position,  and  proportions  should  properly  be 
made  of  the  alleged  forgeries  and  the  model  with  the  tracing  over  the 
model  as  it  was  made  if  it  is  a  tracing.  Such  forgeries  may  diverge 
more  from  each  other  than  any  one  of  the  number  differs  from  the 
model,  for  the  reason  that  divergencies  may  be  in  opposite  directions 
in  different  tracings.  When  the  model  is  not  found,  therefore,  a  close 
resemblance  in  size,  proportions  and  design  in  alleged  forgeries  that 
form  a  similar  group  is  especially  significant,  as  allowance  must  be 
made  for  divergencies  from  the  original  which  may  apparently  make 
the  imitations  differ  more  from  each  other  than  any  one  would  differ 
from  the  original. 


280  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

imitated,  and  such  writing,  as  in  a  simulated  forgery, 
invariably  lacks  that  appearance  of  carelessness  and  un- 
conscious freedom  which  is  always  one  of  the  strongest 
evidences  of  genuineness.  Where  a  tracing  diverges 
from  the  model  in  design  of  letters  it  will  naturally 
tend  to  conform  to  the  style  of  the  operator  so  that  the 
divergencies  may  in  a  very  slight  degree  tend  to  identify 
the  one  who  makes  the  tracing  as  belonging  to  a  certain 
class  of  writers,  although  such  resemblance  is  not  often 
of  much  force  as  pointing  to  an  individual. 

A  careful  consideration  of  the  process  required  to 
produce  a  traced  forgery  will  show  that  divergencies  of 
a  certain  character  may  actually  point  to  the  process  of 
tracing.  If  in  the  tracing  the  general  line  of  direction 
of  each  stroke  is  closely  followed,  with  occasional  slight 
departures  in  either  direction  which,  however,  are  con^ 
stantly  corrected  and  do  not  affect  all  subsequent  parts, 
such  zigzag  movements,  beginning  at  the  same  place  as 
the  copy  and  coming  out  in  the  end  at  practically  the 
same  place,  suggest  that  a  model  was  being  followed, 
and  naturally  this  suggestion  is  still  stronger  if  there 
are  three  or  four  such  signatures  in  a  group.  A  traced 
forgery  may  thus  resemble  the  track  of  one  attempting 
to  follow  an  indistinct  trail  where  the  track  of  the  one 
following  may  slightly  diverge  from  time  to  time,  but 
if  it  regularly  returns  to  the  original  line  of  direction 
it  shows  that  a  track  is  being  followed. 

The  most  significant  points  of  identity  are  the  distinct 
beginning  points  of  separated  parts  of  the  signature, 
the  downward  or  shaded  lines  and  especially  the  exact 
reproduction  of  unusual  features  in  the  model  signa- 
ture. As  already  suggested  such  a  tracing  may  actually 


TRACED  FORGERIES  281 

reproduce  with  the  utmost  care  and  fidelity  a  peculiarity 
of  a  letter  or  part  of  a  model  signature  which  can  only 
be  found  in  the  model  and  the  tracing.  It  is  easily 
understood  how  such  careful  reproduction  in  a  disputed 
signature  of  what  may  have  been  merely  an  accidental 
slip  of  the  pen  in  the  model  is  very  convincing  evidence 
of  forgery1. 

As  has  been  said,  no  two  genuine  signatures  can  be 
exactly  alike,  but  such  a  statement  should  be  understood 
to  be  true  speaking  microscopically,  and  not  as  the 
carpenter  measures,  because  by  examining  a  great 
number  of  genuine  signatures  of  certain  exceptional 
writers  signatures  can  be  found  which  are  nearly  identi- 
cal. The  degree  of  resemblance  to  be  expected  in  any 
case  is  not  based  on  any  fixed  principles  but  is  a  matter 
that  depends  altogether  upon  the  writing  habits  of  the 
one  whose  signature  is  in  question.  Some  persons  write 
with  much  greater  uniformity  than  others,  and  simi- 
larities in  such  writing,  in  size  and  proportions,  would, 
as  a  natural  result,  be  more  common  than  the  same  simi- 
larities in  the  writing  of  one  who  writes  an  erratic  hand ; 
the  significance  of  identity,  therefore,  as  bearing  on  the 
question  of  genuineness  should  be  determined  in  every 
case  by  the  actual  circumstances  of  that  case. 


Identity  of  position  of  an  alleged  forgery  and  a  model,  or  between 
two  or  more  alleged  forgeries  in  relation  to  the  edges  of  a  document 
may  be  exceedingly  forcible  evidence  of  tracing.  If  the  signatures  in 
question  are  written  on  printed  blank  forms  of  exactly  the  same  size, 
and  it  is  found  by  placing  the  papers  together  with  edges  even  that 
the  signatures  not  only  match  in  size  and  shape  but  also  that  they 
occupy  exactly  the  same  field  on  the  document,  this  suggests  at  once 
that  the  forgery  was  traced  from  a  model  found  on  a  similar  form  by 
placing  one  exactly  over  the  other,  and  such  identity  of  position  is  a 
very  conclusive  confirmation  of  other  evidences  of  forgery.  This  rela- 
tion of  signature  to  the  edges  of  the  paper  has  been  one  of  the  evi- 
dences of  tracing  in  several  important  cases. 


282  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  significance  of  unusual  identity  as  evidence  of 
forgery  would  naturally  be  strengthened  by  increasing 
the  number  of  signatures  in  dispute.  If  one  alleged 
forgery  of  one  name  closely  resembles  a  certain  possible 
model  such  resemblance  in  connection  with  other  evi- 
dence may  be  very  strong  evidence  of  forgery,  and  it  is 
naturally  a  more  suspicious  circumstance  if  two,  three, 
or  four  such  signatures  closely  resemble  the  model.  In 
a  recent  important  case  a  model  signature  and  five  dupli- 
cates were  found,  and  in  another  famous  case  four  traced 
signatures  from  the  same  model  all  appeared  on  dif- 
ferent pages  of  the  same  will. 

The  question  of  identical  signatures  being  produced 
in  succession  is  also  a  matter  that  should  be  considered. 
As  we  have  seen  if  comparison  is  made  of  all  the  thou- 
sands of  signatures  that  certain  uniform  writers  have 
written  there  can  be  found,  by  picking  out  the  most 
favorable  examples,  some  very  similar  to  each  other,  but 
if  the  attempt  is  made  to  find  two  such  similar  signatures 
written  in  succession  the  search  becomes  still  more  dif- 
ficult, and  if  three  or  four  practically  identical  successive 
signatures  are  looked  for,  as  for  example  on  the  same 
document  or  on  the  same  series  of  papers,  they  can  not 
be  found. 

A  careful  study  of  the  tracing  process  and  of  the 
signatures  in  the  reported  traced  forgery  cases  and 
numerous  other  similar  cases  shows  that  entire  identity 
is  practically  impossible,  unless  produced  by  some 
mechanical  process  like  engraving,  lithography  or  a 
rubber  stamp.  Absolute  identity  of  this  character  would 
obviously  in  itself  show  that  such  writing  could  not  be 
genuine.  In  considering  the  force  of  identity  as  evi- 


TRACED  FORGERIES  283 

dence  of  forgery,  it  must  therefore  be  remembered,  in 
the  first  place,  that  no  traced  imitation  of  a  model  will 
be  an  exact  fac-simile  of  it,  so  that  what  is  described 
as  identity  is  really  only  approximate  identity.  It  is 
easily  possible  to  exaggerate  the  force  of  this  identity 
alone  as  proof  of  forgery;  some  of  the  frequently 
quoted  statements  on  the  subject  do  exaggerate  it.  If 
it  is  contended  that  this  identity,  which  it  is  to  be  under- 
stood is  only  approximate,  is  "impossible  in  any  genuine 
signatures  written  by  any  one  at  any  time,"  the  natural 
and  conclusive  answer  to  such  a  challenge  is  the  bring- 
ing forward  of  actual  signatures  by  other  writers  that 
are  as  nearly  identical  as  the  disputed  signature  and  the 
alleged  model.  In  some  cases  such  signatures  can  be 
found. 

This  may  seem  to  prove  that  identity  has  no  value 
whatever  as  evidence  of  forgery  in  any  case  but 
it  does  not  by  any  means  do  so.  Such  similarity  may 
be  quite  far  removed  from  absolute  identity  and  yet 
show  conclusively  that  one  signature  was  undoubtedly 
made  from  another  or  that  two  or  more  signatures  were 
made  from  one  model.  Suspicious  identity  is  that  which 
suggests  the  tracing  process  and  which  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  theory.  If  all  beginning  points  dis- 
tinctly diverge  and  distinct  strokes  do  not  coincide  then 
numerous  other  identities  would  not  necessarily  point 
to  tracing,  while  divergencies  of  fine  lines  at  inter- 
mediate points,  especially  if  such  divergence  returns  to 
the  line  of  the  model,  would  not  be  inconsistent  with  the 
tracing  theory,  and  finally,  if  the  theory  of  tracing  is 
to  be  maintained  the  line  quality  of  the  alleged  tracing 
must  in  some  degree  indicate  the  tracing  movement  and 


284  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

not  exactly  conform  to  that  shown  in  the  genuine 
writing.  Identity  in  the  opinions  quoted  beginning 
on  page  274  is  described  as  "almost  exactly,"  "slight 
departures,"  and  "almost  exact,"  all  indicating  a  sus- 
picious similarity  which  yet  was  not  exact  identity. 

The  significance  of  the  identity  in  each  case  must  also, 
as  stated  above,  be  considered  as  applying  only  to  the 
one  particular  writer  in  that  case.  The  degree  and 
character  of  the  identity  must  also  be  examined  and 
properly  interpreted  by  consideration  of  the  length  of 
name,  the  fineness  of  the  strokes,  the  number  of  detached 
parts,  and  the  number  of  separate  signatures  that  are 
suspiciously  alike.  In  one  case  a  witness  who  had  testi- 
fied that  identity  had  no  significance  except  to  prove 
genuineness,  was  on  cross-examination  led  to  say  that 
fifty  signatures  might  be  just  alike  and  all  genuine,  but 
he  did  reluctantly  admit  that  a  group  of  one  hundred 
exact  duplicates  would  attract  his  attention  as  peculiar. 

In  his  charge  to  the  jury  in  the  case  illustrated  in 
Fig.  51  (Fidelity  Trust  Co.  Buffalo,  N.  Y.  vs.  Ex- 
ecutors of  Lydia  Cox  estate) ,  the  late  Justice  Childs  of 
the  New  York  Supreme  Court,  after  describing  how  it 
was  alleged  each  of  the  three  writers  on  three  occasions 
had  written  so  that  the  three  groups  of  three  names  could 
all  be  practically  superimposed,  said  in  an  impressive 
manner  and  with  emphasis  on  "likely" :  "Gentlemen,  it 
is  for  you  to  say  wiiether  such  a  thing  is  likely  to  hap- 
pen." The  jury  decided  that  it  was  not  likely  to  happen. 

The  most  interesting  and  famous  testimony  on  the 
subject  that  has  been  given  is  undoubtedly  that  of  Pro- 
fessor. Pierce,  in  the  case  referred  to  above.  He  was 
called  as  a  witness  to  give  testimony  based  on  the  cal- 


TRACED  FORGERIES  285 

culus  of  probabilities,  as  to  how  frequently  all  the  thirty 
downward  strokes  in  a  given  signature  would  coincide. 
The  basis  of  the  calculation  was  the  observed  coinci- 
dences in  the  genuine  signatures  in  the  case.  This  testi- 
mony illustrates  the  application  of  mathematics  to  such 
a  problem1. 

Illustrations  of  Traced  Forgeries. 

Illustrations  are  desirable  in  all  kinds  of  disputed 
document  investigations,  but  in  traced  forgery  inquiries 
their  use  is  sometimes  imperative  if  the  true  character  of 
a  skillfully  executed  traced  forgery  is  to  be  conclusively 
shown.  To  those  who  consider  only  the  question  of  form 

Professor  Pierce  testified  in  part  as  follows:  "I  have  carefully 
examined  the  signatures  of  1  and  10  of  Sylvia  Ann  Howland.  I  have 
placed  them  over  each  other,  and  have  compared  their  magnified 
photographs.  The  coincidence  is  extraordinary  and  of  such  a  kind  as 
irresistibly  to  suggest  design,  and  especially  the  tracing  of  10  over  1. 
There  are  small  differences  in  every  portion  of  the  signatures,  so  that 
no  letter  of  the  one  is  precisely  identical  with  that  of  the  other;  but 
the  differences  are  such  as  to  strengthen  the  argument  for  design  sug- 
gested by  the  coincidences.  .  .  The  mathematical  discussion  of  this 
subject  has  never,  to  my  knowledge,  been  proposed,  but  it  is  not  dif- 
ficult; and  a  numerical  expression  applicable  to  this  problem,  the 
correctness  of  which  would  be  instantly  recognized  by  all  the  mathe- 
maticians of  the  world,  can  be  readily  obtained. 

"The  relative  frequency  of  coincidence  expresses  how  often  there 
is  a  coincidence  in  either  of  the  characteristic  lines;  such  as  in  line  1 
for  example.  The  product  of  the  relative  frequency  into  itself  ex- 
presses how  the  coincidence  of  a  characteristic  line  1  is  combined  with 
that  of  line  2;  the  cube  of  the  relative  frequency  of  coincidence  shows 
how  often  there  will  be  the  simultaneous  combination  of  the  coinci- 
dences of  the  three  first  lines,  and  so  on. 

"Finally,  the  relative  frequency  must  be  multiplied  into  itself  as 
many  times  as  there  are  characteristic  lines  to  express  how  often  there 
can  be  a  complete  coincidence  in  position  of  all  the  lines  of  the 
signature. 

"In  the  case  of  Sylvia  Ann  Howland  therefore,  this  phenomenon 
could  occur  only  once  in  the  number  of  times  expressed  by  the  thirtieth 
power  of  five  [nine  hundred  and  thirty-one  quintillions  of  times — 
931,000,000,000,000,000,000],  This  number  far  transcends  human  ex- 
perience. So  vast  an  improbability  is  practically  an  impossibility. 
Such  evanescent  shadows  of  probability  cannot  belong  to  actual  life. 
They  are  unimaginably  less  than  those  least  things  which  the  law 
cares  not  for."  (The  signatures  are  shown  on  page  301.) 


286  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

in  a  writing  even  a  clumsy  tracing  is  promptly  passed  as 
genuine,  and,  with  such  an  examiner,  it  may  be  difficult 
to  prove  that  a  good  tracing  is  not  a  genuine  writing. 

Illustrations  are  desirable  for  two  principal  purposes ; 
first  to  show  hesitation,  tremor,  inequalities  in  pen  pres- 
sure, stops,  retouching,  and  that  line  quality  in  general 
which  points  to  a  drawing  instead  of  a  writing  movement, 
as  is  well  illustrated  in  Figs.  53  and  54.  With  large  and 
accurate  photographs  showing  these  conditions  the  true 
character  of  a  traced  signature  can  usually  be  clearly 
seen.  The  second  purpose  to  be  served  by  photographs 
is  to  show  suspicious  identity,  or  approximate  identity, 
of  a  disputed  signature  and  an  alleged  model,  or  to  show 
identity  of  several  disputed  signatures. 

The  first  condition,  or  that  of  suspicious  line  quality, 
can  be  shown  most  clearly  by  photographic  enlarge- 
ments by  both  direct  and  transmitted  light.  Experi- 
mental photographs  of  various  degrees  of  enlargement 
should  be  made  and  those  used  that  show  best  the  actual 
conditions.  When  practicable  it  is  advisable  to  make 
enlargements  of  two  and  also  of  four  diameters,  and  in 
some  cases  enlargements  of  from  about  eight  to  twelve 
diameters  should  be  made. 

It  is  not  usually  helpful  to  make  single  illustrations 
larger  than  can  be  seen  all  at  once,  or  nearly  all  at  once, 
at  about  the  ordinary  reading  distance.  As  is  well  under- 
stood, when  an  object  is  removed  in  distance  it  is  in 
effect  reduced  in  size,  and,  except  to  be  used  as  a  chart 
so  that  all  can  see  at  once,  a  photograph  larger  than  about 
eleven  by  fourteen  inches  is  not  necessary,  as  this  size 
is  about  as  large  as  can  be  seen  at  the  ordinary  reading 
distance.  Many  suggestions  regarding  photographs, 


TRACED  FORGERIES  287 

applicable  in  such  cases,  are  made  in  the  chapter  on 
photography. 

The  second  class  of  illustrations  require  considerable 
care  and  ingenuity,  if  the  evidence  pointing  to  the  trac- 
ing method  is  to  be  shown  effectively.  The  method 
desirable  depends  somewhat  upon  the  conditions,  but  the 
same  facts  should  always  be  shown  in  more  than  one 
way;  what  may  appeal  to  one  observer  may  not  be  so 
clearly  seen  by  another. 

Some  of  the  methods  employed  are:  (1)  the  photo- 
graphing of  the  signatures  on  transparent  films  so  that 
they  may  easily  be  superimposed ;  ( 2 )  the  photographing 
of  the  signatures  under  glass  carrying  uniform  ruled 
squares  so  that  parts  may  be  compared  by  inspection; 

(3)  the  photographing  of  the  signatures  as  composites 
or  one  over  the  other  with  identical  lines  superimposed; 

(4)  the  photographic  reproduction  of  the  signatures 
with  various  lines  drawn  over  them  representing  identi- 
cal measurements ;  ( 5 )  the  photographing  of  the  signa- 
tures  with  a  superimposed  transparent  rule  showing 
exact  measurements  of  positions  of  various  parts  and 
especially  of  beginning  points;  (6)  the  comparison  with 
each  other  of  pencil  tracings  of  the  signatures;  (7)  the 
illustration  of  identity  by  actual  measurements  of  the 
originals  from  various  points;  (8)  the  cutting  apart  and 
matching  together  in  various  ways  of  parts  of  different 
photographed  signatures   showing  the  unnatural  uni- 
formity; (9)  and,  finally  the  superimposing  of  the  orig- 
inals over  each  other  by  transmitted  light  at  the  window 
or  over  an  artificial  light. 

As  far  as  practicable  these  various  methods  are  illus- 
trated here,  and  their  desirability  is  briefly  discussed. 


288  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

It  is  impossible  by  the  methods  available  on  the  restricted 
pages  of  this  book  to  do  more  than  suggest  what  can  be 
done  with  large,  clearly  printed  photographs. 

The  test  of  tracing  that  naturally  is  made  first  is  that 
of  superimposing  the  original  writings  by  transmitted 
light.  This  method  is  useful,  especially  as  a  first  step, 
but  frequently  is  not  practicable  on  account  of  the  thick- 
ness of  the  papers  or  the  fineness  of  the  lines,  and  under 
these  conditions  it  may  be  possible  to  find  genuine  signa- 
tures that  apparently  are  as  nearly  alike  as  a  disputed 
signature  and  an  alleged  model. 

Composites  made  by  photography  for  some  reasons 
are  also  not  the  best  illustrations  as  the  signatures  hide 
each  other  and  tend  to  emphasize  the  dissimilarities  which 
are  clearly  seen,  while  the  identities  tend  to  cover  and 
hide  each  other ;  composites  are,  however,  often  desirable 
in  connection  with  other  illustrations,  especially  when 
the  identity  is  very  close. 

It  is  obvious  that  pencil  tracings  may  be  objectionable 
because  being  made  by  hand  the  personal  equation  of 
the  tracer  can  not  be  removed,  and  also  because  it  is 
dangerous  to  allow  anyone  to  make  a  tracing  of  a  dis- 
puted signature  that  is  suspected  of  being  a  tracing.  A 
careless  pencil  tracing  of  a  suspected  signature  may 
destroy  important  evidence  of  tracing  in  the  disputed 
signature  itself. 

The  objection  to  the  method  of  drawing  identical  lines 
over  two  or  more  signatures  that  are  suspiciously  alike 
is  that  the  lines  tend  to  cover  up  the  signatures  if  any 
considerable  number  are  drawn  and  the  personal  equa- 
tion again  enters  into  the  operation.  Actual  measure- 
ments of  the  signatures  themselves  should  always  be 


TRACED  FORGERIES  289 

made  and  opportunity  and  assistance  should  always  be 
given  for  court  and  jury  to  verify  all  measurements. 
For  this  purpose  enlarged  photographs  are  almost  in- 
dispensable as  a  verification  of  testimony. 

The  photographing  of  the  signatures  under  ruled 
squares  is  in  numerous  ways  the  most  effective  as  well 
as  the  fairest  way  to  illustrate  suspicious  identity;  no 
lines  are  hidden  and  the  divergencies  as  well  as  the  simi- 
larities can  be  seen,  neither  signature  is  covered  and 
suspicious  hesitation,  pen-lifts,  or  line  quality  can  also 
be  seen.  There  can  be  no  valid  objection  to  the  method 
as  it  in  effect  is  simply  a  method  of  measuring  the 
signatures1.  This  method  was  first  used  in  the  Rice- 
Patrick  case  and  has  since  been  employed  in  numerous 
other  important  traced  forgery  cases2. 

xNor  did  the  fact  that  the  photograph  exhibited  the  signature  on  a 
back-ground  of  ruled  squares  destroy  the  admissibility  of  the  offered 
picture.  .  .  The  photographs  were  taken  by  placing  over  them  a 
glass  upon  which  such  lines  were  drawn  forming  uniform  squares.  The 
purpose  was  to  exhibit  the  uniformity  in  the  size  and  proportion  of 
the  letters  in  the  two  photographs.  .  . 

No  one,  I  think,  will  dispute  that  a  glass,  plain,  or  with  magnifying 
powers,  marked  with  lines  so  as  to  afford  a  measure  of  space  and  a 
standard  of  proportion,  could  have  been  put  into  the  hands  of  the 
jury  for  the  purpose  of  applying  it  to  the  signatures,  whether  of  written 
size,  or  of  magnified  size.  It  would  amount  to  no  more  than  applying 
a  measure  to  the  signatures,  and  then  viewing  the  measure  and  the 
signatures  through  a  glass. 

So  we  think  there  was  no  error  in  the  admission  of  these  photo- 
graphs.— The  State  vs.  Matthew  J.  Ready.  New  Jersey  Supreme 
Court,  1909.  (72  Atlantic  Reporter,  495.) 

2These  cases  are:  The  Rice-Patrick  civil  and  criminal  case  in  New 
York  City;  the  Crawford-Schooley  will  case,  at  Scranton,  Pa.;  the 
Messchert-Essenhower  will  case,  at  Reading,  Pa.;  the  Parr  will  case,  at 
Louisville,  Ky. ;  the  Boyer-Lydia  Cox  Estate  case,  at  Buffalo,  N.  Y. ; 
the  Burtis  will  case,  at  Auburn,  N.  Y.;  the  case  of  The  State  vs  Matthew 
Ready,  Newark,  N.  J.,  and  the  case  of  Pye  vs.  Pye,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
In  the  trial  of  all  of  these  cases  photographs  of  the  signatures  under 
ruled  squares  were  admitted  in  evidence  over  objection,  and  in  nearly 
if  not  all  of  the  same  cases  transparent  film  photographs  and  com- 
posite photographs  were  also  admitted. 


290 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Blnte^'D    hundred    al&\d 

s 


¥: 


FIG.  113 — The  two  disputed  signatures  in  the  Schooley- 
Crawford  case  at  Scranton,  Pa. 


FIG.  114 — Identity  of  signatures  shown  by  matching  upper  part  of  one  on  to  the 
lower  part  of  the  other. 


TRACED  FORGERIES  291 


FIG.  115 — Retouching  on  codicil  signature  in  Schooley-Crawford  case. 

NOTES  REGARDING  ILLUSTRATIONS  OF  TRACED  FORGERIES. 

For  use  in  this  chapter  diligent  effort  has  been  made  to  secure 
photographs  of  the  signatures  in  all  the  traced  forgery  cases  referred 
to  in  the  decisions  and  in  all  other  important  cases  tried  but  not 
appealed.  In  some  of  the  cases,  strange  to  say,  no  photographs  were 
made  and  the  original  papers  have  been  lost.  The  following  pages 
show  all  that  can  now  be  obtained,  and  illustrate  the  leading  features 
of  the  subject.  Nearly  all  the  illustrations  were  made  from  actual 
exhibits  used  in  the  trial  of  the  cases  but  are  necessarily  much  re- 
duced in  size. 

Figures  113-115. 

These  illustrations  are  from  the  celebrated  Schooley-Crawford  will 
case  at  Scranton,  Penn.  A  claim  to  an  estate  of  more  than  a  million 
dollars  was  based  on  the  genuineness  of  these  two  signatures  which 
were  attached  to  an  alleged  will  and  codicil.  The  claimant  discovered 
after  making  the  document  that  it  was  a  suspicious  circumstance  that 
the  two  signatures  should  be  so  nearly  identical  and  before  the  case 
was  brought  into  court  the  codicil  it  was  claimed  was  accidentally 
torn  to  pieces  and  one  small  piece  was  lost.  Enough  remained,  how- 
ever, to  show  the  extraordinary  identity.  The  two  signatures  were 
actually  made  from  a  rubber  stamp  in  some  manner  and  one  of  them 
had  been  carefully  retouched  as  is  clearly  shown  in  Fig.  115.  The 
claim  was  vigorously  pressed  by  a  leading  attorney  but  the  will  was 
declared  a  forgery  by  the  prothonotary  and  later  by  a  jury.  The 
claimant,  Schooley,  and  his  two  witnesses  were  indicted  and,  in  March, 
1908,  at  the  beginning  of  the  criminal  trial,  all  of  them  came  into 
court  and  pleaded  guilty  and  were  sent  to  the  penitentiary.  All  of 
these  illustrations  are  from  exhibits  in  the  case.  The  identity  of  the 
signatures  was  shown  in  numerous  ways  and  the  matchings  of  the  cut 
signature  over  the  other  showed  clearly  "the  piece  that  was  lost." 


292  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Figures  116-120. 

These  illustrations  are  from  a  very  similar  case  tried  about  the 
same  time  at  Reading,  Penn.  In  this  case  the  claimant  had  one 
genuine  letter  from  which  he  made  a  will  bequeathing  him  "Ten 
thousand  dollars  and  the  estate  in  France."  From  the  same  genuine 
paper  he  also  made  standard  writings  to  prove  the  will  and  all  by  the 
tracing  process.  In  this  case  there  was  the  model  signature  and  five 
duplicates  and  it  will  be  seen  that  not  only  the  signatures  but  the 
words  "Very  truly  yrs"  also  superimpose.  "Ex.  Z"  is  the  model,  "  Ex. 
C"  is  the  claim  paper  and  "Ex.  F"  was  one  of  the  alleged  "standards." 
The  jury  promptly  decided  that  the  will  was  a  forgery.  The  illustra- 
tions show  the  various  methods  of  showing  suspicious  identity.  The 
very  suspicious  line  quality  of  two  of  the  disputed  signatures  in  this 
case  is  shown  in  Fig.  54. 

Figures  121-122. 

These  illustrations  are  from  one  of  the  noted  Land  Fraud  Cases 
in  Oregon  and  are  from  photographs  made  by  Mr.  J.  Frank  Shearman, 
Questioned  Document  Examiner,  of  Wichita,  Kansas,  who  was  a  wit- 
ness in  the  case.  The  composite  shows  the  suspicious  identity  and  the 
line  quality  in  the  enlarged  photographs  showed  clearly  the  char- 
acter of  the  writings.  The  defendants  pleaded  guilty. 

Figure  123. 

This  illustration  is  from  the  alleged  model  for  a  disputed  signature 
and  the  disputed  signature  itself  photographed  under  glass  with 
squares  so  that  comparison  of  parts  can  be  made  by  inspection.  The 
writer  followed  the  strange  custom  of  preceding  his  signature  with 
the  figure  of  a  hand  as  shown.  The  alleged  model  writing  not  only 
furnished  a  copy  for  the  signature  but  the  hand  as  well  and,  in  addi- 
tion, other  parts  of  the  claim  paper.  Another  phase  of  this  same  case 
is  illustrated  in  Fig.  108. 

Figure  124. 

The  case  illustrated  in  Fig.  124  was  tried  in  1887,  but  no  photo- 
graphs were  made  and  those  here  shown  were  made  for  use  in  this 
connection.  An  interesting  excerpt  from  the  opinion  in  the  case  is 
printed  on  page  276.  In  the  original  writing  in  the  case,  not  seen  in 
the  illustration,  an  identical  outline  was  strong  evidence  of  the  method 
employed  and  as  the  opinion  states,  "There  is  too  much  method  shown 
in  the  latter  signature." 

Figure  125. 

This  model  and  traced  imitation  are  photographed  to  illustrate  one 
method  of  showing  identity.  An  enlarged  photograph  of  this  disputed 
signature  showed  retouching  entirely  inconsistent  with  genuineness 
and  the  identity  showed  the  method  employed  in  making  the  signature. 

Figure  126. 

This  illustration  is  from  other  signatures  in  the  case  illustrated  in 
Fig.  51.  This  is  the  case  in  which  the  presiding  judge  said,  "Gentle- 
men, it  is  for  you  to  determine  whether  such  a  thing  is  likely  to 
happen."  Mere  inspection  in  this  case  shows  that  the  signatures  were 
drawn  from  a  copy. 


TRACED  FORGERIES  298 

Figures  127-130. 

In  the  celebrated  Rice-Patrick  will  case  (New  York  City)  it  hap- 
pened that  five  genuine  signatures  were  actually  written  on  the  same 
day  that  it  was  alleged  the  Patrick  will  was  signed.  Figures  127  and 
128  show  the  four  disputed  signatures  and  the  five  genuine  signatures 
and  a  comparison  of  them  shows  the  extraordinary  and  significant 
similarity  of  the  four  and  the  characteristic  variation  in  size,  propor- 
tions and  relation  of  parts  of  the  genuine  signatures. 

Considering  only  the  questions  of  shading,  line  quality  and  pen 
position  the  four  signatures  are  clearly  not  genuine  and  these  facts 
in  connection  with  the  significant  identities  constitute  overwhelming 
proof  of  forgery.  As  the  Appellate  court  said  (Affirmed  by  Court  of 
Appeals)  "This  fact  [of  identity]  taken  in  connection  with  the  other 
evidence  bearing  on  the  subject,  is  of  such  a  character  as  to  irresistibly 
lead  to  the  conclusion"  [of  forgery].  A  brief  excerpt  from  the  inter- 
esting opinion  is  printed  on  pages  274,  275. 

Figures  127,  128,  and  129  are  from  actual  exhibits  used  at  the  trial. 
Figure  130  was  made  at  the  time  but  was  not  introduced  in  evidence. 

There  is  shown  in  Fig  53,  on  page  111,  a  detail  of  traced  signature 
No.  2  which  shows  the  slow,  painful,  drawing  movement  employed  to 
make  certain  parts  of  all  four  of  the  traced  signatures. 

Figures  131-133. 

These  are  illustrations  taken  from  the  original  exhibits  in  the  case 
of  the  disputed  signatures  in  the  celebrated  "Rowland  case."  Signa- 
ture No.  1  was  the  genuine  will  signature  and  signatures  10  and  15 
were  signatures  to  alleged  codicils.  Signatures  1  and  10  were  those 
compared  in  the  testimony  of  Professor  Pierce,  quoted  on  page  285. 
In  addition  to  the  wonderful  identity  shown  in  "1"  and  "10"  these 
two  signatures  were  also  exactly  the  same  distance  from  the  edge  of 
the  paper.  Signature  15  shows  striking  identities  but  the  names 
were  spaced  differently  due,  it  was  alleged,  to  the  moving  of  the 
paper  during  the  operation  of  tracing.  Figure  132,  from  signature  15, 
shows  the  slow,  drawing  movement  employed  in  making  the  dis- 
puted signatures  and  Fig.  133  shows  that  signature  10  "covers" 
signature  1.  The  case  is  further  discussed  on  page  277. 

Figure  51. 

In  Fig.  51  on  page  103  is  shown  another  set  of  signatures  from  the 
case  illustrated  in  Fig.  126.  Notwithstanding  the  extraordinary  identi- 
ties in  these  signatures  it  was  contended  by  three  banks  that  they  were 
genuine  and  the  attorney  adverse  to  the  genuineness  of  the  signatures 
waited  nearly  two  years  before  bringing  the  case  into  court,  he  himself 
thinking  the  signatures  were  genuine.  He  submitted  the  checks  inde- 
pendently to  three  handwriting  specialists  who  all  reported  that  eleven 
checks  were  forgeries  by  tracing.  It  was  so  conclusively  shown  that 
the  signatures  were  not  genuine  that  although  three  cases  were 
pending  only  one  was  tried. 


294 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


7£ 

x  "C"      4?t 


^yt 


FIG.   116 — Model  "Very  truly  yrs"  and   signature,  and  two 
traced  imitations  photographed  under  ruled  squares. 


FIG.  117 — Five  genuine  signatures  showing  natural  variation  in 
size,  proportions  and  position. 


TRACED  FORGERIES 


295 


296 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


oandoned  an  entry  made  under  the  homestead  Jaws  ot  t 


FIG.  121 — Exhibits  in  one  of  the  "Oregon  Land  Fraud"  cases 
of  two  traced  forgeries. 


FIG.  122 — Composite  of  the  above  signatures. 


FIG.  123 — Disputed  signature  and  "hand"  and  alleged  model  in  the  Parr  Will  case  at 

Louisville,  Ky. 


297 


FIG.  124 — The  model  and  forged  imitation  in  case  of  Day  vs.  Cole,  65  Mich.  129. 


FIG.  125 — Model  and  traced  forgery  with  superimposed  glass  rule  showing 

actual  measurements  and  points  of  identity.     The  tracing  was  almost 

all  retouched  or  overwritten.    Case  of  Pye  vs.  Pye,  Rochester,  N.Y. 


#•/•/  - ; 

S 

•fj-zs. 


£&     *3LXXj£/C«- 

^^dLu^   C^ 

^^^ 


FIG.  126 — A  genuine  signature,  "No.  51,"  and  two  "traced"  forgeries.    The 
identities   in   size,  proportions,  spacing  and  alignment  and  many 
other  particulars  show  by  mere  inspection  that  the  sig- 
natures "e"  and  "d"  were  made  from  "51." 


298 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.   127 — The  four  disputed  signatures  in 

the  Rice-Patrick  civil  and 

criminal  case. 


w^^efe: 


i  ^pz  zq 


FIG.   128 — Five  genuine   signatures  of 

the  same  date  as  the  alleged 

Patrick  will. 


TRACED  FORGERIES 


299 


FIG.  129 — The  four  disputed  signatures  in  the  Rice-Patrick  case  photographed 
with  ruled  squares  showing  identities  in  the  signatures. 


300 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  130— The  four  signatures  to  the  Patrick  will  with  identical  lines  drawn 
from  point  to  point. 


TRACED  FORGERIES 


301 


FIG.  131 — The  genuine  will  signature  and  the  two  disputed  signatures,  10 
and  15,  in  the  Rowland  case. 


FEG.  132— Enlargement  of  portions  of  signature  15  showing  line  quality. 


FIG.  133 — Composite  of  signature  10  over  signature  1  showing  identity. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS 

Letters  of  various  kinds  are  frequently  offered  as 
evidence  if  they  are  not  the  actual  basis  of  an  issue  in 
a  trial  at  law,  and  their  correct  identification  is  often  a 
matter  of  very  great  importance.  Spurious  letters  are 
sometimes  manufactured  expressly  for  the  purpose  of 
being  used  as  evidence  in  a  legal  contention,  and  fraudu- 
lent or  genuine  letters  may  be  brought  forward  in  the 
midst  of  a  trial  when  an  immediate  decision  as  to  their 
genuineness  is  imperative.  Disputed  letters,  however, 
in  most  cases  are  anonymous  communications  of  an 
abusive  or  threatening  character. 

Anonymous  letters  occasionally  are  of  a  friendly 
nature  but  usually  reflect  with  more  or  less  severity  upon 
the  character  or  conduct  of  some  one.  It  is  important 
to  know  that  in  numerous  instances  the  writing  of  such 
letters  is  one  of  the  earliest  manifestations  of  a  mild  sort 
of  insanity  which  takes  this  peculiar  form;  in  any  case 
that  certainly  is  a  strange  satisfaction  which  comes 
through  saying  disagreeable  things  in  this  manner.  The 
number  of  anonymous  communications  written  is  very 
great,  and  they  range  in  importance  all  the  way  from 
foolish  practical  jokes  to  threats  of  kidnapping,  arson 
and  murder.  Whole  communities  are  sometimes  wrought 
up  over  a  series  of  letters  which  may  for  a  long  time 
baffle  detection.  Anonymous  letters  usually  receive  but 
little  attention,  the  majority  of  them  going  directly  into 

[302] 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  303 

the  waste  basket,  but  sometimes  they  are  of  the  most 
serious  character,  in  many  instances  being  important 
links  in  chains  of  evidence  pointing  to  grave  crimes. 
On  account  of  the  scurrilous  and  obscene  nature  of  many 
anonymous  letters  it  is  illegal  to  send  them  by  mail,  and 
United  States  Commissioners  are  called  upon  to  investi- 
gate great  numbers  of  these  peculiar  missives. 

There  are  some  strange  facts  in  connection  with 
anonymous  letter  writing  known  to  those  frequently 
called  upon  to  make  such  examinations.  One  of  the 
first  is  that  in  many  cases  anonymous  letter  writing  be- 
comes chronic  and  frequently  by  patient  waiting  a  whole 
series  from  the  same  source  can  be  collected.  They  are 
apt  to  increase  in  frequency  and  vehemence  until  there 
is  some  positive  indication  that  they  have  attracted  atten- 
tion and  caused  pain  and  annoyance.  Another  usual 
condition  is  that  the  disguise  employed  is  apt  to  be  partly 
disregarded  or  forgotten  after  the  first  few  letters,  which 
may  be  prepared  with  great  care  and  are  sometimes  very 
effectively  disguised. 

Another  peculiar  fact  of  great  importance  in  connec- 
tion with  the  investigation  of  the  authorship  of  such 
letters  is  that  in  a  large  proportion  of  cases,  perhaps 
twenty  per  cent.,  the  actual  writer  is  also  one  of  those 
who  receive  them  and  is  supposed  to  be  one  of  the 
victims  of  the  work  of  some  one  else.  On  account  of 
this  fact  one  of  the  first  steps  to  be  taken  in  such  an 
inquiry  is  to  learn  the  name  and  get  samples  of  the 
writing  of  every  one  who  claims  to  have  received  similar 
letters.  A  further  surprising  fact  is  that  in  a  large 
majority  of  cases  the  anonymous  letter  writer  is  a  woman 
who  may  write  what  it  does  not  seem  possible  she  could 


304  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

write;  but  often  the  use  of  improper  language  is  un- 
doubtedly a  part  of  the  attempted  disguise.  It  should 
also  be  stated  for  the  protection  of  the  innocent  that 
often  if  not  usually  the  one  first  suspected  of  writing 
anonymous  letters  is  not  the  actual  writer,  and  frequent- 
ly the  actual  writer  is  one  who  for  some  time  wholly 
escapes  even  suspicion. 

At  the  outset  of  an  inquiry  of  this  kind  it  is  im- 
portant to  realize  the  possibility  of  error  unless  every 
precaution  is  observed,  and  even  then,  as  with  any  sub- 
ject, questions  arise  that  no  one  can  answer  with  much 
certainty.  In  many  cases  conclusions  are  based  upon  so 
many  elements  and  are  so  enforced  and  corroborated  that 
they  amount  almost  to  a  mathematical  demonstration, 
while  in  others  only  a  qualified  opinion  can  be  given.  It 
is  a  fact  that  many  errors  are  made  by  those  who  attempt 
to  give  opinions  regarding  disputed  letters.  Volunteers, 
with  no  appreciation  of  the  difficulty  of  the  problem, 
give  offhand  opinions  on  either  side  of  the  most  im- 
portant inquiries,  their  only  qualification  for  the  task 
apparently  being  that  they  themselves  are  able  to  write. 
The  great  majority  of  errors  of  this  kind  are  due  to  the 
fact  that  inadequate  or  improper  standards  are  used,  or 
to  the  causes  outlined  in  the  preceding  chapter  on  in- 
dividual and  general  characteristics  in  writing.  As  there 
shown  it  is  easy  to  understand  how  superficial  knowledge 
or  hasty  judgment  may  lead  to  error.  The  principles  out- 
lined in  the  chapter  just  referred  to  should  be  applied 
to  every  disputed  letter  inquiry.  Other  preceding  chap- 
ters also  have  a  direct  bearing  on  such  investigations. 

Another  fact  that  should  always  be  considered  and 
given  early  attention  in  examining  an  anonymous  writ- 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  305 

ing  for  the  purpose  of  discovering  the  author  is  that  an 
unnatural  or  disguised  hand  cannot  show  greater  writ- 
ing ability  or  skill  than  the  actual  writer  possesses.  Dis- 
guised writing  is  usually  slow  and  clumsy,  but,  whether 
good  or  bad,  it  is  a  fixed  principle  in  determining  its 
authorship  that  all  possible  candidates  must  at  once  be 
excluded  whose  best  natural  writing  shows  a  lower  order 
of  skill  than  the  anonymous  writing.  It  is  important  in 
such  an  inquiry  to  make  a  thorough  analysis  of  the  dis- 
puted writing  on  this  question  of  writing  skill  and  the 
accuracy  and  perfection  of  design  of  every  character. 
This  procedure  will  often  at  once  greatly  reduce  the 
number  of  possible  writers,  for  the  very  good  reason  that 
no  one  will  write  better  than  he  can  write  although  some- 
times he  may  write  much  worse. 

Another  important  initial  step  in  the  inquiry  is  the 
careful  analysis  of  such  a  communication  with  a  view 
of  determining  the  educational,  literary  and  grammati- 
cal ability  of  the  writer.  The  result  of  the  analysis  often 
is  the  prompt  exclusion  of  certain  candidates  under  sus- 
picion whose  ability  in  these  particulars  is  clearly  inferior 
to  that  shown  in  the  anonymous  writing. 

Notwithstanding  the  apparent  difficulties  of  the  task 
the  identification  of  anonymous  letters  in  most  cases  is 
the  simplest  problem  in  connection  with  the  investiga- 
tion of  disputed  handwriting.  The  forger  who  attempts 
to  simulate  only  a  signature  or  who  seeks  to  disguise 
even  a  small  amount  of  his  own  handwriting  assumes  a 
task  of  great  difficulty,  but  when  the  effort  is  made  to 
write  a  complete  letter  or  a  series  of  such  communica- 
tions, the  varied  elements  entering  into  the  problem  are 
so  numerous  that  it  requires  an  extraordinary  degree  of 


306  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

skill  for  the  writer  to  hide  his  personality.  It  is  im- 
portant to  know  that  an  anonymous  letter  of  any  con- 
siderable length  and  particularly  a  series  of  anonymous 
letters  can  in  most  cases  be  positively  identified  if  a  suf- 
ficient quantity  of  genuine  writing  of  the  actual  writer 
is  produced  for  comparison. 

It  should  not  be  understood  that  the  claim  is  made 
that  handwriting  cannot  be  successfully  disguised;  but, 
as  a  rule,  it  is  not.  It  is  erroneously  assumed,  by  the 
educated  as  well  as  the  ignorant,  that  to  disguise  a 
writing  is  a  very  simple  operation,  and  the  subject  is 
given  no  serious  attention.  The  usual  writer  of  such 
letters  makes  no  study  of  the  subject  whatever  and  the 
disguises  ordinarily  adopted  are  so  ineffective  and  trans- 
parent that  it  requires  but  little  experience  to  see  through 
them  at  a  glance,  and,  in  effect,  the  anonymous  writer 
often  unwittingly  writes  his  own  name  on  every  page. 
Anonymous  letters  by  their  writing,  materials  used,  com- 
position and  general  form  often  indicate  at  once  the  sex 
of  the  writer,  and  frequently  show  nationality,  age, 
education  and  occupation,  and  these  facts,  under  the 
known  conditions,  often  point  to  the  probable  author, 
whose  writing  in  the  form  of  letters  should  at  once  be 
obtained  and  compared  with  the  anonymous  letters1. 


general  procedure  should,  if  possible,  be  followed  with  disputed 
letters  which  is  outlined  in  the  chapter  on  simulated  forgeries.  The 
genuine  writing  should,  if  possible,  be  studied  first,  following  the  points 
there  given,  and  in  addition  the  special  points  rererred  to  in  this 
chapter  should  be  carefully  considered.  The  disputed  letters  should 
then  be  studied  and  finally  the  two  sets  of  writing  compared.  The 
subjects  discussed  in  numerous  other  chapters  may  have  an  important 
bearing  on  the  identification  of  a  disputed  letter,  especially  the  chapters 
on  individual  and  general  characteristics,  arrangement  of  writing, 
divergencies  in  genuine  writing  and  systems  of  writing.  Many  of  the 
suggestions  regarding  the  examination  of  what  is  alleged  to  be  a 
complete  simulated  document  (p.  250)  apply  as  well  to  disputed 
letters  and  the  procedure  there  outlined  should  be  carefully  followed. 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  307 

The  points  for  consideration  in  such  an  examination 
are  all  of  the  hundreds  of  writing  characteristics  which 
enter  into  any  considerable  quantity  of  writing  as  con- 
sidered in  a  questioned  signature  alone,  and  in  addition 
to  this,  careful  attention  should  be  given  to  the  question 
of  materials,  composition,  grammar,  spelling1,  idioms, 
division  of  words,  proportions  of  letters,  shading,  align- 
ment, spacing,  margins,  watermarks,  titles,  corrections, 
erasures,  punctuation,  use  of  capital  letters,  underscor- 
ing, abbreviations,  folding,  superscriptions,  typewriting 
and  ink. 

The  writer,  without  study  and  without  careful 
practice,  who  is  successful  in  excluding  all  his  natural 
habits  in  all  these  directions,  and  who  at  the  same  time 
can  adopt  and  consistently  maintain  unnatural  character- 
istics through  a  complete  letter,  and  especially  through 
a  series  of  letters  written  at  different  times,  is  certainly 
a  rare  individual  with  a  very  high  degree  of  natural 
ability.  One  of  the  chief  difficulties  under  which  an 
anonymous  writer  labors  is  that  the  different  letters  be- 
ing written  at  different  times  the  disguises  adopted  are 
not  continuous  and  are  not  consistent  with  each  other, 
so  that  a  collection  of  such  letters  will  usually  indicate 
almost  at  a  glance  the  natural  habits  of  the  writer  and 
the  assumed  habits.  The  anonymous  writer  who  makes 
and  keeps  carefully  made  duplicates  of  all  such  letters 
is  certainly  an  exception  and  is  the  rare  one  who  may 
perhaps  be  able  to  make  a  series  of  such  letters  consistent 
with  each  other. 

Early  in  the  investigation  of  anonymous  writing  care- 

'And  slightingly  as  counsel  treat  the  identity  of  orthography,  writing 
"hit"  for  "it"  in  both  documents,  [show  that]  "it"  is  a  pretty  decided 
hit  after  all. — Reid  vs.  The  Sate,  20  Ga.  684  (1856). 


308  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ful  examination  should  be  made  of  the  inconspicuous 
characteristics  which  in  disguised  writing  often  are  of 
the  most  significance  because  they  are  given  no  atten- 
tion whatever  by  the  writer.  In  disguising  a  writing 
thought  is  naturally  first  given  to  the  conspicuous 
features  which  may  be  much  changed,  while  persistent 
but  inconspicuous  parts  are  not,  as  a  rule,  modified  in 
any  way.  Two  writings,  one  of  which  is  disputed,  may 
appear  very  different  in  general  appearance  but  may 
contain  so  many  small  but  peculiar  and  persistent  char- 
acteristics that  the  conclusion  of  identity  is  irresistible, 
and  again  two  writings  may  be  very  similar  in  certain 
general  features  but  may  differ  in  so  many  significant 
but  inconspicuous  particulars  as  to  show  that  they  were 
undoubtedly  written  by  two  different  writers.  A  dis- 
guise in  inconspicuous  features  alone  would  be  very 
extraordinary  if  not  altogether  inconceivable,  and  could 
only  be  attained  by  the  most  complete  knowledge  of 
these  minute  details  in  combination  with  a  very  high 
degree  of  manual  skill.  When  inconspicuous  character- 
istics persistently  and  consistently  diverge,  the  conclu- 
sion must  be  reached  that  two  such  writings  are  not  by 
the  same  hand;  when  they  coincide  in  sufficient  number 
the  conclusion  is  reached  that  they  were  by  the  same 
writer. 

Some  of  these  inconspicuous  but  highly  important 
features  to  be  first  carefully  compared  are  here  described. 
They  are  numbered  so  that  none  will  be  omitted  in  mak- 
ing the  comparison: 

The  shape,  position,  angle,  size,  slant  and  height  of 
connections  between  the  following  small  letters  and  the 
following  letter  in  a  word;  (1)  b,  (2)  f,  (3)  o,  (4)  p, 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  309 


FIG.  135— Inconspicuous  characteristics.    A  few  examples  of  the  great  number 
of  variations  of  the  seventeen  specified  letters. 


310  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

(5)  s,  (6)  v,  (7)  w.  Form  of  final  small  letters  (8)  w, 
(9)  r.  The  form,  shading,  crossing,  and  height  of  initial 
small  (10)  t,  and  intermediate  and  final  small  (11)  t. 
The  initial  and  intermediate  small  letter  (12)  a.  The 
form  of  initial  and  final  small  letter  (13)  o.  The  form 
of  initial  and  intermediate  small  letter  (14)  c.  The 
distance  that  sharp  angles  are  retraced  at  base  of  letters 
(15)  m,  (16)  n,  (17)  h. 

The  second  group  of  inconspicuous  characteristics,  as 
important  perhaps  as  the  first,  are:  (18)  The  length, 
width  and  slant  of  the  upper  loop  letters  1,  b,  h,  k,  and  f 
compared  with  the  shortest  or  one  space  letters  and  also 
as  compared  with  the  lower  loop  letters  g,  j,  y,  z;  (19) 
the  height  of  separation  above  the  line  of  the  two  strokes 
of  the  small  letters  b,  1,  h  and  t  at  the  beginning  and 
also  in  the  middle  of  words;  (20)  the  distance  that  up 
strokes  are  traced  back  at  the  sharp  angles  in  the  con- 
nections at  the  tops  of  letters  a,  g,  i,  j,  s,  w,  u,  y;  (21) 
the  length,  slant,  direction  and  exact  shape  of  beginning 
strokes  of  all  words ;  the  same  of  ( 22 )  ending  strokes  of 
all  words;  (23)  exact  location  of  shading  on  all  loop 
letters;  (24)  the  ovals  of  small  a  and  o  and  their  connec- 
tion with  preceding  letters;  (25)  position,  form  and  size 
of  figures,  all  punctuation  marks  and  the  signs  &,  $, 
and  all  abbreviations. 

This  preliminary  procedure  alone,  if  carefully  fol- 
lowed out,  is  usually  sufficient  to  lead  to  a  very  positive 
conclusion  as  to  the  identity  of  two  sets  of  writings.  If 
this  method  is  followed  in  the  comparison  of  two  writ- 
ings that  resemble  each  other  very  closely  but  which  are 
actually  by  different  writers  it  will  very  quickly  be  seen 
that  two  writings  by  different  writers  will  inevitably 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  311 

differ  in  many  of  the  particulars  named.  The  questions 
of  variety  of  forms  in  handwriting  and  of  the  mathe- 
matical probability  of  two  complete  handwritings  being 
identical,  as  discussed  in  Chapter  XIV.,  have  a  direct 
bearing  on  this  phase  of  the  study  of  anonymous  letters. 

The  favorite  disguises  adopted  in  anonymous  letters 
are,  a  change  of  slant,  a  different  size  and  proportion  of 
writing,  the  printing  of  the  communication  instead  of 
putting  it  in  script,  the  use  of  a  different  kind  of  pen 
from  that  ordinarily  employed,  and  the  invention  of 
certain  fantastic  forms  which  may  give  a  very  different 
superficial  appearance  to  a  page  of  writing.  As  already 
observed  the  most  significant  characteristics  are  usually 
not  disguised  in  the  least  for  the  simple  reason  that  the 
average  writer  with  his  knowledge  and  study  of  the  sub- 
ject is  unable  to  recognize  the  peculiar  and  significant 
characteristics  in  his  own  writing  as  compared  with  writ- 
ing in  general.  It  is  rare  indeed  that  the  disguise 
adopted  is  more  than  merely  superficial,  and  in  most 
cases  it  covers  only  a  small  number  of  the  characters  em- 
ployed and  but  few  of  the  habits  exemplified.  A  change 
in  the  slant  and  a  change  in  a  few  of  the  forms  of  the 
capital  letters  are  often  the  only  disguises  attempted, 
and,  while  such  changes  may  affect  the  general  appear- 
ance of  writing  in  a  striking  manner,  it  is  easily  seen 
that  the  bulk  of  the  writing  of  such  a  letter  remains 
practically  undisguised. 

Writing  is  so  automatic  that  the  anonymous  writer, 
particularly  if  he  becomes  excited  and  vehement  and  his 
attention  is  mainly  directed  to  the  matter  of  composi- 
tion, forgets  the  effort  to  disguise  and  almost  inevitably 
lapses  into  his  natural  hand.  In  a  disguised  letter  cover- 


312  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ing  two  or  more  pages,  it  is  almost  certain  that  some 
letters,  words  or  parts  will  be  written  naturally,  and 
when  even  the  greatest  care  seems  to  he  taken,  some 
foolish,  tell-tale  thing  is  quite  sure  to  be  included  that 
points  conclusively  to  the  writer. 

Few  writers  know  their  own  general  habits  in  such  a 
simple  matter  as  the  arrangement  of  words  and  lines 
on  a  page,  and  have  never  compared  their  own  practice 
with  that  of  others  in  the  matter  of  leaving  margins  on 
the  left,  right,  top  and  bottom  of  the  page,  as  to  spacing 
between  words,  or  as  to  the  change  in  such  spacing  when 
punctuation  points  are  inserted,  or  to  the  various  other 
important  points  enumerated  in  the  chapter  on  arrange- 
ment of  writing.  The  writer  who  uses  a  hyphen  both  at 
the  end  of  the  line  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  follow- 
ing line  thinks  this  is  a  universal  habit,  and  the  writer 
who  makes  quotation  marks  on  the  base  line  even  with 
the  line  of  writing  in  the  German  style,  thinks  this  is 
the  usual  American  custom,  and  the  writer  who  begins 
the  paragraph  in  the  middle  or  nearly  at  the  right  side 
of  the  sheet  instead  of  the  left  has  no  idea  that  this  also 
is  not  the  usual  practice.  One  who  makes  the  interroga- 
tion point  facing  the  wrong  way  and  places  the  comma 
and  period  up  even  with  the  tops  of  the  small  letters 
instead  of  on  the  line  thinks  this  is  the  way  they  are 
made  in  the  books,  and  one  who  omits  punctuation  en- 
tirely has  the  idea  that  but  few  writers  use  these  un- 
necessary marks ;  and  the  one  who  has  the  strange  notion 
that  a  line  is  incomplete  without  some  kind  of  a  punctua- 
tion mark  is  under  the  impression  that  this  also  is  accord- 
ing to  rule. 

The  possible  identity  of  pens,  ink  and  paper  in  the 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  313 

examination  should  always  be  considered.  In  more  than 
one  instance  it  has  been  shown  that  a  disputed  writ- 
ing was  actually  written  on  a  piece  of  paper  torn  from 
a  sheet  upon  which  a  conceded  writing  was  written, 
showing  at  least  that  the  paper  was  once  in  the  hands 
of  the  one  who  disputed  the  letter.  Blotters  or  writing 
pads  have  been  found  in  connection  with  such  cases 
(Fig.  144)  in  the  possession  of  suspected  persons,  show- 
ing the  actual  impression  of  a  part  of  the  writing  in 
question,  and  the  work  of  a  peculiar  pen  or  of  unusual 
ink  may  in  some  cases  point  to  a  possible  writer. 

The  latitude  of  possible  variety  in  genuine  handwrit- 
ing differs  greatly  in  different  individuals,  ranging  from 
the  illiterate  writer  who  makes  but  one  form  of  each 
letter — and  sometimes  does  not  even  know  how  to  make 
all  the  letters — to  the  ready  writer  who  makes  a  variety 
of  capital  letter  forms  and  frequently  modifies  many  of 
the  small  letters,  as  they  are  written  in  the  initial,  inter- 
mediate, or  final  position  in  a  word.  The  illiterate  may 
not  have  a  mental  pattern  of  all  the  written  characters, 
while  the  free  writer  may  actually  use  fully  twice  or 
three  times  as  many  forms.  The  bearing  of  this  fact  is 
that  anonymous  writing  by  one  who  makes  a  variety 
of  forms  may  be  connected  with  genuine  writing  by 
identity  in  the  varied  as  well  as  the  normal  forms,  thus 
increasing  the  strength  of  the  connection,  while  the  illit- 
erate by  the  deficiency  of  his  knowledge  of  forms  may 
thus  show  his  connection  with  an  anonymous  writing. 
Questioned  illiterate  writing  frequently  consists  of  a 
combination  of  script  forms  and  Roman  capitals,  or  pen 
or  pencil  printing,  and  often  such  writing  contains 
original  or  "freak"  forms  of  letters,  abbreviations,  or 


314  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

punctuation  marks  that  are  individual  creations  and  are 
of  the  utmost  significance  as  indicating  individuality. 
Pen  printing  may  show  striking  individuality  and  this 
may  be  true  even  when  standards  of  the  kind  are  made 
by  request.  In  such  cases  printed  standard  writing 
should,  if  possible,  always  be  obtained. 

Assumed  illiteracy  is  a  frequent  disguise,  and  it  is 
sometimes  important  to  determine  whether  letters  were 
actually  written  by  an  illiterate  person  or  by  a  writer 
who  is  assuming  illiteracy.  On  account  of  its  fixed  char- 
acter and  lack  of  skill  it  is  usually  easier  positively  to 
identify  the  handwriting  of  an  illiterate  person  than 
the  writing  of  one  who  writes  much  and  easily.  One  of 
the  common  indications  of  illiteracy  as  shown  by  writing 
is  the  faulty  arrangement  of  words,  lines,  paragraphs, 
and  pages,  proving  general  unf  amiliarity  with  the  whole 
writing  process.  Illiteracy  is  also  shown  in  a  measure 
by  materials  and  by  the  manner  of  folding  the  docu- 
ment; errors  in  punctuation  also  in  a  measure  indicate 
illiteracy,  but  in  some  of  these  matters  illiteracy  may  be 
successfully  simulated.  An  educated  person  in  simulat- 
ing illiterate  writing  may  include  glaring  errors  in  spell- 
ing and  use  uncouth  ungrammatical  expressions,  but 
may  forget  to  disguise  the  arrangement,  paragraphing 
and  punctuation,  which  fact  would  unquestionably  show 
that  the  writing  was  not  by  an  illiterate  person.  The 
illiterate  writer  is  of  course  entirely  incapable  of  simulat- 
ing the  writing  and  style  of  an  educated  writer. 

In  connection  with  suspicions  regarding  the  author- 
ship of  anonymous  letters,  or  actual  accusations  that 
sometimes  are  prematurely  made,  it  may  be  important 
to  consider  the  question  as  to  whether  letters  were  writ- 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  315 

ten  by  a  man  or  by  a  woman.  Sex  is  often  very  clearly 
indicated  in  disputed  letters  by  composition,  by  choice 
of  words,  and  especially  by  certain  peculiar  expressions 
or  idioms  which  are  characteristic  of  one  or  the  other  of 
the  sexes.  Profanity  or  threats  of  personal  violence 
naturally  have  a  masculine  significance,  while  expres- 
sions regarding  the  appearance  of  things,  such  as 
"horrid"  or  "awful  scene,"  more  frequently  point  to  a 
feminine  writer.  When  an  anonymous  letter  is  care- 
fully analyzed  and  its  words,  its  thought  and  its  manner 
of  expression  are  all  considered,  it  will  often  appear  very 
plainly  whether  it  is  the  work  of  a  man  or  a  woman. 
Interjections,  epithets  and  degree  and  manner  of  empha- 


^   KOAA* 

I  6 


FIG.  136 — Beginning  of  an  anonymous  letter  which  by  its  composition,  subject 
matter  and  handwriting  shows  clearly  it  is  the  work  of  a  woman. 

sis  are  sometimes  particularly  significant  as  indicating 
sex.  For  the  better  study  of  the  language  alone  it  is  an 
excellent  plan  to  have  made  a  typewritten  copy  of  the 
whole  letter  with  the  sentences  separated. 

The  sex  indications  in  handwriting  itself  in  some  cases 
may  be  very  clear,  but  these  characteristics  are  not  very 
numerous  and  in  some  instances  may  be  somewhat  mis- 


316  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

leading.  This  question  of  sex  should,  however,  be  care- 
fully considered  in  every  way  possible  and  a  systematic 
investigation  is  often  fruitful,  although  many  times  a 
disputed  writing  contains  no  pronounced  sex  character- 
istics, or  not  a  sufficient  number  on  which  to  base  a 
definite  judgment. 

The  peculiar  style  of  writing  known  as  the  "angular 
system,"  already  described  and  illustrated,  is  a  distinctive 
woman's  hand  and  this  writing,  or  distinct  traces  of  it, 
almost  certainly  points  to  a  woman  writer.  This  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  this  style  of  writing  is  taught  only  to 
women,  and  there  is  no  good  reason  why  it  should  be 
imitated  or  acquired  by  men.  It  was  formerly  much  in 
vogue  and  has  long  been  a  distinctive  "society"  hand. 
It  is  the  style  which  has  been  taught  for  many  years  in 
certain  church  schools  for  girls,  and  in  America  is  the 
exclusive  style  of  writing  taught  in  many  ladies'  sem- 
inaries. It  has  never  been  taught  in  the  public  schools 
and  has  not  been  taught  directly  to  many  writers,  but, 
because  it  has  been  fashionable,  it  has  been  consciously 
and  unconsciously  imitated  by  thousands  of  women 
writers. 

This  style  of  writing,  as  we  have  seen,  is  strikingly 
distinctive,  and  if  once  learned  is  almost  certain  to  leave 
its  indelible  impress  upon  a  handwriting  whatever  other 
system  or  style  may  afterwards  be  acquired.  It  is  usual- 
ly unshaded  and  often  is  large  and  uncouth;  it  is  some- 
times very  illegible  and  has  many  very  peculiar  capital 
letter  designs.  Many  of  its  capital  and  small  letters 
begin  in  the  same  unusual  manner  with  an  upward  stroke 
made  toward  the  left,  which  has  the  effect  of  apparently 
bending  the  beginning  stroke  of  words  around  into  the 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  317 

letter  or  word  following.  Many  words  in  this  writing 
are  ended  with  a  straight  horizontal  stroke  often  dis- 
tinctly shaded,  which  is  a  peculiar  and  distinctive  char- 
acteristic of  the  actual  models  of  the  system.  In  making 
an  examination  of  disputed  letters  for  the  purpose  of 
determining  if  they  show  characteristics  of  the  angular 
hand  or  of  any  distinctive  nationality  or  system,  it  is 
very  helpful  to  have  for  comparison  numerous  specimens 
of  such  writing  by  different  writers.  Great  care  should 
be  taken  not  to  connect  two  sets  of  writings  by  different 
writers  simply  because  they  both  show  characteristics  of 
the  angular  hand  or  of  any  other  definite  system  or 
nationality. 

Entirely  outside  of  system  characteristics  there  is  un- 
doubtedly in  some  writing  a  certain  feminine  quality 
that  in  some  instances  is  very  easily  recognized,  while 
in  other  writing  distinctive  masculine  characteristics  ap- 
pear. These  differences  are  due  to  many  causes,  among 
which  are  environment,  the  effect  of  business  require- 
ments and  the  influence  of  occupation,  as  well  as  the 
mental  and  physical  differences  in  the  sexes  which  no 
doubt  in  some  degree  affect  writing.  The  writing  of 
women  as  a  whole  is  naturally  more  delicate  than  the 
writing  of  men  and  contains  more  little  superfluous 
peculiarities  and  mannerisms;  and  as  a  rule  it  is  more 
carefully  finished  in  minor  details.  There  are,  of  course, 
masculine  women  and  feminine  men,  and  the  writing  of 
such  men  and  women  may  show  characteristics  that  are 
misleading.  The  habit  of  putting  shading  on  letters  in 
little  bunches,  particularly  at  the  ends  of  words  or  at 
the  finishing  parts  of  certain  letters  is  a  feminine  trait, 
while  the  heavy  shading  of  every  downward  stroke  and 


318  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

especially  vicious  jabs  of  the  pen  that  almost  cut  the 
paper,  are  distinctly  masculine.  The  fact  should  always 
be  considered  that  women  are  more  apt  to  acquire  the 
characteristics  of  men's  writing  than  that  men  are  likely 
to  learn  to  write  like  women.  This  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  more  often  women  do  the  work  of  men  than  men 
do  the  work  of  women.  The  woman  in  business  naturally 
acquires  a  business  style  of  writing  which  may  differ 
but  little  from  that  of  her  brothers  similarly  situated. 
M.  Alfred  Binet,  a  French  psychologist,  after  a  care- 
ful investigation  of  this  subject,  makes  the  statement 
that  in  French  writing  it  is  possible  to  determine  accur- 
ately the  sex  of  the  writers  in  about  seventy-five  cases 
out  of  a  hundred. 

Graphology,  or  what  is  known  as  character  reading 
from  handwriting,  would  be  of  great  assistance  in  identi- 
fying disputed  handwriting  if  the  so-called  science  were 
more  certain  in  its  results.  This  method  of  investigation, 
at  least  in  its  present  state,  seems  to  be  of  doubtful  value 
as  an  aid  in  the  discovery  and  proof  of  the  facts  in  any 
kind  of  questioned  document  inquiry1.  So  many  modify- 


lrrhe  subject  of  graphology  can  hardly  escape  serious  criticism  as 
long  as  its  advocates  attempt  to  do  too  much,  and  its  authors  put  into 
the  books  on  the  subject  such  silly  stuff  as  is  found  in  them.  It  would 
be  much  better  if  those  who  practice  graphology  did  not  attempt  to 
find  in  handwriting  indications  of  "disturbances  in  the  functions  of 
the  bowels,"  or  "altruism  restricted  to  family,"  or  "love  of  animals," 
or  "sterility  either  in  the  male  or  female."  The  following  quotations 
show  to  what  lengths  graphologists  will  go: 

The  sweep  of  the  pen  to  the  left  is  the  graphic  sign  for  defensive- 
ness,  and,  when  the  stroke  describes  the  segment  of  a  circle,  and 
sweeps  in  that  direction,  protectiveness  and  the  love  of  the  young  or 
animals  is  surely  indicated  thereby. — Richard  Dimsdale  Stocker,  in 
The  Language  of  Handwriting,  p.  93  (1901). 

Briefly,  then,  I  have  noticed  that  a  love  of  athletics  is  indicated  by 
the  small  letters  p,  y,  and  g,  having  an  abnormally  long  down-stroke 
commencing  on  a  level  with  the  other  part  of  the  letter.  .  .  In  cases 
where  sterility,  either  in  male  or  female,  seemed  indicated  by  lack  of 
family  in  married  life,  I  have  frequently  noticed  an  extreme  lack  of 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  319 

ing  and  disturbing  elements  enter  into  the  problem  of 
determining  from  handwriting  alone  the  higher  attri- 
butes of  human  character  that  it  seems  dangerous  to  put 
much  reliance  upon  it.  This  statement  is  made  with  full 
appreciation  of  the  skill  acquired  by  certain  exponents 
of  graphology,  and  also  with  some  knowledge  of  their 
errors  and  limitations.  Discredit  and  ridicule  are  brought 
upon  the  subject  by  the  tendency  of  its  advocates  of  all 
grades,  in  their  practice  and  their  books,  to  carry  their 
deductions  to  a  ridiculous  extreme. 

Every  one  knows  who  has  had  even  limited  experience 
that  through  handwriting  if  not  by  it  certain  things 
regarding  an  individual  are  shown  with  more  or  less 
clearness.  Is  it  not  possible,  however,  that  many,  per- 
haps unconsciously,  attribute  to  the  handwriting  what 
the  message  itself  reveals?  One  sentence,  spoken  or 
written,  may  give  a  definite  measure  of  the  mental  or 
even  spiritual  stature  of  a  man.  Excluding,  however, 
the  content  or  message,  which  the  graphologist  does  not 
seem  inclined  to  do  when  he  insists  on  complete  letters 
for  examination,  it  is  true  that  handwriting  itself  does 


liaison  between  the  letters  of  a  word. — J.  Harrington  Keene, 
("Grapho")  in  The  Mystery  of  Handwriting,  p.  17  (1896). 

From  a  table  of  General  and  Particular  Graphologic  Signs:  Words 
whose  letters  are  not  near  together  although  they  may  be  connected, — 
a  person  easy  of  access.  Capitals  joined  to  the  letter  following, — altru- 
ism. Capitals  joined  to  the  letter  following  after  making  a  loop, — 
altruism  restricted  to  family  or  to  coterie.  Small  m  and  n  in  form  of 
the  u, — natural  benevolence.  Dots  placed  very  high, — religious  spirit. 
Capital  M  the  first  stroke  lower  then  the  second, — envious  pride. — John 
Holt  Schooling,  in  Handwriting  and  Expression  (1892),  a  translation 
of  "1'Ecriture  et  le  Caractere,"  by  M.  Crepieux-Jamin,  Paris. 

The  left-handed  bending  on  right-handed  main  strokes,  seems — if 
placed  at  the  upper  part  of  the  stroke — -to  show  disturbances  in  the 
functions  of  the  bowels;  at  the  intermediate  and  lower  part  of  the 
stroke,  it  is  indicative  of  different  kinds  of  diseases  of  the  stomach. 
The  latter  form  is  seemingly  of  graver  significance  than  the  former. — 
Magdaline  Kintzel-Thumm,  in  Psychology  and  Pathology  of  Handwrit- 
ing, p.  137  (1905). 


320  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

show  certain  characteristics  of  the  individual.  The  most 
pronounced  of  these  are  perhaps  extremes  of  vigor  and 
of  weakness;  education  is  shown  in  some  measure,  and 
illiteracy  with  more  certainty  by  the  bare  forms  them- 
selves. Neatness  and  its  opposite  are  also  shown,  as 
they  would  be  by  clothing  or  personal  appearance ;  f  ussi- 
ness  and  its  opposite  can  also  no  doubt  be  distinguished 
in  some  cases,  and  some  other  similar  traits. 

Those  with  the  fullest  scientific  knowledge  of  the 
human  brain  put  the  least  reliance  upon  what  has  been 
called  the  science  of  phrenology,  which  at  one  time  was 
very  popular,  and  of  handwriting  it  also  seems  to  be 
true  that  a  thorough  study  of  the  subject,  especially  of 
its  chronology  and  history,  tends  to  weaken  belief  in 
what  are  described  as  the  principles  of  graphology.  It 
is  one  thing,  through  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  sub- 
ject in  its  various  phases  and  history,  to  discover  and 
interpret  the  thousands  of  writing  characteristics  by 
which  writing  is  identified  and  shown  to  be  genuine  or 
false,  and  an  altogether  different  and  more  audacious 
thing  to  attempt  to  attach  to  all  these  characteristics  a 
definite  character  value.  In  some  foreign  countries  the 
word  graphologist  seems  to  be  applied  interchangeably 
to  those  who  attempt  to  read  character  from  handwrit- 
ing and  also  to  those  who  investigate  disputed  docu- 
ments and  testify  in  courts  as  experts  as  to  the  identity 
of  handwriting,  but  in  America  and  England  a  sharp 
distinction  is  drawn  between  the  two  classes.  A  graph- 
ologist rarely  if  ever  testifies  in  court  in  America  or 
England. 

There  are  many  devoted  disciples  of  graphology 
throughout  the  world,  and  the  science  may  be  a  true  one 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  321 

as  they  firmly  believe — and  it  is  no  doubt  true  in  some 
measure — but  many  are  of  the  opinion  that  it  has  not 
yet  entirely  proved  itself.  Two  journals  devoted  to 
graphology  are  published  in  Europe  and  the  subject 
seems  to  be  most  popular  in  Germany  and  France. 
Many  books  of  widely  varying  quality  have  been  written 
on  the  question  and  in  many  ways  the  study  is  a  most 
fascinating  one.  It  is  but  fair  to  say  that  the  subject 
should  always  be  judged  by  its  ablest  exponents  and  not 
by  the  many  ignorant  pretenders  whose  palpable  blund- 
ers often  make  it  ridiculous. 

The  finding  of  suitable  standards  of  comparison  in 
disputed  letter  cases  is  a  matter  of  great  importance  and 
should  receive  the  most  careful  attention.  The  subject 
is  discussed  in  the  chapter  treating  of  standards  of  com- 
parison and  the  suggestions  there  given  should  be  care- 
fully followed.  By  a  systematic  review  of  all  the  busi- 
ness, social  and  general  interests  of  the  one  whose  writ- 
ing is  sought  ample  standards  are  often  found  in  cases 
where  the  effort  at  the  outset  is  apparently  hopeless. 
One  of  the  frequent  characteristics  of  the  work  of  the 
amateur  examiner  is  the  acceptance  and  exclusive  use 
of  standards  that  may  be  not  only  too  meager  in  quantity 
but  entirely  unsuitable  in  kind. 

The  peculiar,  personal  characteristics  contained  in  a 
series  of  anonymous  letters,  which  also  appear  in  a  series 
of  standard  letters,  may  be  so  numerous  that  the  chance 
of  two  different  writers  employing  all  the  same  char- 
acters and  showing  all  the  same  habits  of  omission  and 
commission  is  entirely  beyond  any  reasonable  probability, 
and  the  only  conclusion  possible  is  that  both  series  of 
letters  are  the  production  of  the  same  mind  and  the  same 


322  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

hand.  An  opinion  in  no  case  should  be  based  upon  a 
single  characteristic,  but  upon  mutually  confirmatory 
characteristics  which  in  combination  can  lead  to  but  one 
conclusion.  This  topic  is  treated  more  fully  in  the 
chapter  on  individual  and  general  characteristics. 

In  every  case  all  unconscious,  frequent  characteristics 
should  be  carefully  observed  in  both  series  of  letters  as 
outlined,  and  then  carefully  compared.  Those  things 
especially  should  always  be  looked  for  that  even  a  clever 
disguise  will  not  be  likely  to  cover.  Before  reaching  a 
final  judgment  as  to  identity  or  difference  the  weight 
and  significance  of  the  various  characteristics  must  neces- 
sarily be  carefully  considered.  As  has  heretofore  been 
shown,  some  similarities  and  some  differences  have  but 
little  significance  while  others  have  great  weight.  It  is 
just  at  this  point  that  the  limitations  of  the  uninformed 
are  shown.  Of  what  avail  is  it  for  one  who  is  ignorant 
of  chemistry  to  observe  a  chemical  reaction?  It  means 
no  more  to  him  than  to  an  untaught  child.  In  this  same 
way  similarities  and  differences  in  writing,  especially 
in  that  which  is  disguised,  are  dim  and  shadowy  unreali- 
ties to  one  who  does  not  know  what  a  handwriting  char- 
acteristic is.  With  such  an  observer,  who  is  unbiased 
and  honest,  an  opinion  is  based  only  upon  what  he  sees 
and  understands  which  may  be  very  little  of  that  before 
him  which  is  really  important  and  significant.  Too  often 
he  sees  only  what  is  pointed  out  to  him  and  what  he  is 
expected  to  see. 

Finally,  as  in  any  disputed  document  inquiry,  illustra- 
tions should  be  made  and  reasons  given  for  whatever 
opinion  is  advanced  so  that  an  intelligent  man  called 
upon  to  decide  the  question  can  see  and  understand  and 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  323 

weigh  the  testimony.  In  this  connection  the  court,  with 
trained  mind  and  ability  in  weighing  testimony,  by  time- 
ly participation  and  pointed  inquiry,  kept  entirely  within 
the  legal  barriers,  can  greatly  assist  an  earnest  jury  in 
reaching  a  correct  conclusion.  The  interests  of  justice 
would  undoubtedly  be  promoted  by  enlarging  the  powers 
of  the  presiding  judge  in  American  courts,  and  in  this 
particular  field  he  may  greatly  assist  in  finding  and 
proving  the  fact. 

Juxtaposition  of  Writings. 

In  many  cases  it  is  necessary  that  writings  be  grouped 
in  proper  form  for  comparison  if  the  fact  regarding 
their  identity  or  difference  is  to  be  clearly  seen  and 
proved.  If,  as  Professor  Wigmore  says  (p.  41),  the 
writings  are  to  be  presented  to  "instantaneous  percep- 
tion" the  parts  must  be  grouped  close  together.  This 
can  only  be  done  by  the  aid  of  photography.  The  method 
is  the  same  to  prove  identity  or  difference  and  only  serves 
to  assist  the  perception  in  arriving  at  the  truth. 

As  outlined  in  the  chapter  on  photography  it  is  im- 
possible for  the  average  observer  to  carry  form  or  color 
impressions  even  from  the  pages  of  one  book  to  another, 
and  to  be  compared  things  must  be  looked  at  side  by 
side.  In  Fig.  138  and  also  in  Fig.  142  it  is  easy  to  see 
the  unmistakable  connection  between  the  writings  when 
they  are  brought  close  together.  Unmistakable  differ- 
ence may  also  be  shown  in  the  same  manner  as  is  well 
illustrated  in  Figs.  110  and  111.  Slight  differences  or 
resemblances  in  separate  instances  may  not  be  seen,  but 
when  grouped  and  looked  at  all  together  cannot  be  over- 
looked. 


324  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  underlying  principle  in  this  method  of  compari- 
son, as  clearly  stated  by  Professor  James  and  already 
quoted  in  a  footnote  (p.  234),  is  so  important  that  it 
deserves  a  place  in  the  regular  text  in  this  connection. 
He  says,  "Suppose  no  one  element  of  either  compound 
to  differ  from  the  corresponding  element  of  the  other 
compound  enough  to  be  distinguished  from  it  if  the  two 
are  compared  alone.  .  .  .  Although  each  difference 
by  itself  might  pass  unperceived,  the  total  difference 
.  '.  .  may  very  well  be  sufficient  to  strike  the  sense. 
In  a  word,  increasing  the  number  of  'points'  involved 
in  a  difference  may  excite  our  discrimination  as  effectu- 
ally as  increasing  the  amount  of  difference  at  any  one 
point."  Figures  3,  56,  73,  110,  111  are  excellent  illustra- 
tions of  this  important  principle. 

THE    ILLUSTRATIONS. 
Figure  137. 

This  is  a  typical  "Black  Hand"  letter  in  a  New  York  city  case. 
To  emphasize  the  demand  in  this  instance  the  marble  stairway  on  one 
of  the  floors  of  an  apartment  house  was  blown  out  by  a  bomb.  Such 
a  series  of  letters  usually  furnishes  sufficient  handwriting  basis  for  a 
positive  identification  if  the  right  person  is  suspected  and  his  genuine 
writing  supplied.  In  this  case  the  writer  was  not  found. 

Figure  138. 

In  the  case  of  People  vs.  A.  J.  Whiteman,  the  noted  bank  forger, 
tried  at  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  in  1905,  it  was  claimed  that  the  accused  was 
in  various  cities  at  the  time  certain  forgeries  were  committed,  but 
registered  under  an  assumed  name.  This  illustration  shows  a  genuine 
registration  and  the  alleged  registrations  from  hotels  in  six  different 
cities.  The  words  "&  wife,"  "Syracuse"  and  "New  York"  are  peculiarly 
individual.  See  also  connections  between  letters,  pen  position,  and 
shading.  The  accused  was  convicted. 

When  these  six  hotel  registrations  are  brought  together  by  the  aid 
of  photography  the  connection  between  them  is  unmistakable.  Ex- 
clusion of  photography  in  cases  of  this  kind  is  equivalent  to  the 
exclusion  of  competent  and  material  testimony.  Photographs  are  now 
rarely  excluded,  although  always  objected  to,  and  in  some  jurisdictions 
it  is  now  almost  if  not  quite  reversible  error  to  exclude  them.  The 
tendency  of  all  courts  of  all  states  is  toward  that  procedure  which 
Assists  in  showing  the  facts.  In  at  least  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a 
hundred  photographs  are  now  admitted  and  the  most  enlightened  and 
progressive  courts  will  hardly  listen  to  objections  to  them. 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS 


325 


FIG.  137— A  "Black  Hand"  Letter. 


.  A  .. 


FIG.  138— A  genuine  signature  and  six  "aliases"  in  six  hotel  registers  in  six  dif- 
ferent cities. 


326  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Figures  139,  140,  141. 

These  sad  communications  are  all  "suicide  notes"  and  emphasize 
the  necessity  for  handwriting  examinations  and  the  vital  importance 
of  such  investigations.  In  the  case  of  Fig.  139  the  husband  was  ac- 
cused and  convicted  of  murder,  but  not  on  evidence  based  on  the  note 
as  no  evidence  bearing  on  its  authorship  was  presented  by  the  prosecu- 
tion. After  conviction,  however,  realizing  that  the  authorship  of  the 
note  was  the  key  to  the  whole  case,  the  note  and  writing  of  the  ac- 
cused and  the  wife  were  submitted  to  specialists.  It  was  then  most 
conclusively  shown  by  a  number  of  enlarged  and  juxtaposed  photo- 
graphs that  the  wife  undoubtedly  wrote  the  note  and  as  a  result  the 
convicted  man  was  pardoned  by  the  governor  of  the  state  on  the 
advice  of  the  prosecuting  officer. 

In  the  case  illustrated  in  Fig.  140  (photographed  by  William  J. 
Kinsley,  Examiner  and  Photographer  of  Documents,  New  York),  the 
note  was  written  by  the  suicide  as  were  also  many  others,  and  the  final 
question  to  be  determined  was  whether  others  aided  and  abetted  her  to 
commit  suicide.  It  was  alleged  that  the  copy  for  the  notes  was  sup- 
plied by  those  who  would  profit  by  the  death. 

In  the  case  illustrated  in  Fig.  141  there  was  suspicion  that  the  death 
was  not  suicidal,  but  it  was  so  clearly  shown  from  the  handwriting 
that  the  note  was  genuine  that  the  inquiry  was  discontinued. 

Figure  142. 

This  illustration  shows  clearly  that  the  average  writer  is  almost 
entirely  unconscious  of  the  fact  that  his  own  writing  is  full  of  peculiar 
individualities.  The  first  part  of  the  illustration  shows  the  beginning 
lines  of  a  most  vicious  anonymous  letter.  The  suspected  writer  was 
asked  at  a  preliminary  examination  to  write  the  matter  from  dictation 
and  the  second  part  of  the  illustration  was  the  astonishing  result  which 
amounted  almost  to  an  open  confession. 

Figure  143. 

This  illustration  also  shows  how  entirely  unconscious  many  writing 
characteristics  are.  The  first  line  is  from  an  anonymous  letter,  the 
second  and  third  are  from  standard  writings  by  the  alleged  writer. 
This  writer  had  the  strange  habit  of  beginning  with  a  capital  letter 
all  words  in  which  the  small  "o"  was  the  first  letter.  Although  the 
anonymous  letter  was  written  in  backhand  as  a  disguise  every  word 
beginning  with  "o"  was  distinctly  capitalized. 

Figure  144. 

This  illustration  was  made  to  show  how  a  signature  may  be  con- 
nected with  a  blotter  impression.  These  impressions  on  a  blotter  are, 
of  course,  reversed  and  it  may  not  appear  until  they  read  correctly 
from  left  to  right  how  plain  they  are.  In  order  to  reverse  the  blotter 
impression  when  photographing  it,  the  plate  should  be  reversed  in  the 
plateholder,  which  will  make  the  resulting  print  read  the  other  way. 
In  making  such  a  photograph  it  is  simply  necessary  after  focusing  to 
rack  the  camera  forward  the  thickness  of  the  plate  and  the  result  can- 
not be  distinguished  from  a  photograph  made  in  the  ordinary  way. 
There  are  other  occasions  requiring  reversed  photographs  and  this 
method  will  apply  in  any  case. 


ANONYMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS  327 


:   / 


J  ' 


// 


FIG.  139— A  suicide  note.     If  the  woman  wrote  it  she  committed  suicide,  if  she  did 
not  write  it  she  was  murdered. 


FIG.  140— One  of  a  series  of  suicide  notes. 


328 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  141 — A  questioned  suicide  note. 


FIG.  142 — Four  lines  of  an  anonymous  letter  and  four  lines  of  a  "request 
writing  written  from  dictation. 


AXONVMOUS  AND  DISPUTED  LETTERS 


329 


A  w  . 


.*S-*'^4_X 


/ 


^f  •••      ^**O 


FIG.  143 — Line  from  anonymous  letter  and  two  lines  from  suspected  writer 
showing  individuality  in  use  of  capital  letters. 


FIG.  144— A  writing  and  a  blotter  impression   of  it 
photographed  for  comparison  on  reversed  plate. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS1 

Questions  regarding  ink  frequently  arise  in  connec- 
tion with  the  investigation  of  disputed  documents.  An 
inquiry  of  this  kind  is  sometimes  merely  collateral  and 
may  have  only  an  indirect  bearing  on  the  investigation, 
or  may  be  a  matter  of  vital  importance.  Among  the 
great  variety  of  questions  on  the  subject  there  are  many 
that  no  competent  man  will  attempt  to  answer  with 
sufficient  definiteness  or  certainty  to  make  the  answer 
of  value  as  evidence;  unfortunately,  however,  there  are 
witnesses  who  undertake  to  answer  any  question,  and 
this  particular  phase  of  questioned  document  investiga- 
tions, perhaps  more  than  any  other,  offers  an  oppor- 
tunity to  the  pretender  and  the  charlatan.  It  is  there- 
fore important  to  know  what  cannot  be  shown  as  well 
as  what  is  a  proper  subject  for  investigation.  I  Fortun- 
ately many  of  the  questions  regarding  ink  can  be  ans- 
wered and  illustrated  in  such  manner  that  the  answer 
is  not  a  mere  opinion,  but  evidence  of  the  most  con- 
vincing character. 

One  of  the  most  frequent  and  most  important  ques- 
tions is  whether  an  ink  is  like  or  different  in  kind  from 
ink  on  other  parts  of  the  same  document  or  on  other 

lrThat  portion  of  this  chapter  relating  to  the  recording  of  ink  colors 
and  the  description  and  use  of  the  Color  Microscope  in  the  investigation 
of  disputed  documents  was  first  printed  in  the  Chicago  Legal  News, 
Vol.  XI,  No.  23  (Jan.,  1908),  and  afterwards  reprinted  in  the  Criminal 
Law  Journal  of  India,  Vol.  VII,  No.  6,  published  at  Lahore,  India. 
[330] 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  331 

documents.  This  is  a  question  that  many  times  admits 
of  the  most  positive  and  convincing  answer.  A  second 
question  of  the  same  class  is  whether  two  writings  made 
with  the  same  kind  of  ink  were  made  with  the  same  ink 
or  with  inks  of  different  qualities  or  in  different  condi- 
tions. A  third  question  is  whether  documents  of  different 
dates,  or  a  succession  of  differently  dated  book  entries, 
show  the  natural  variation  in  such  writing  or  whether 
the  result  points  to  one  continuous  writing  under  identi- 
cal conditions.  The  fourth  inquiry,  in  some  ways  the 
most  important  of  all,  is  as  to  the  age  of  a  writing  as 
shown  by  the  ink. 

In  considering  the  subject  of  ink  in  its  relation  to 
the  investigation  of  documents  it  throws  light  on  the 
inquiry  to  examine  briefly  the  characteristics,  qualities 
and  differences  in  the  inks  in  common  use.  Many  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  inks  are  known  and  made,  but  the  three 
classes  of  black  ink,  now  used  almost  exclusively  in  this 
country,  are  iron-nutgall  ink,  or  so  called  writing  fluid, 
logwood  ink  and  nigrosine  ink.  Although  they  may 
look  exactly  alike  these  three  inks  differ  from  each  other 
radically,  and,  even  in  the  form  of  fine  written  lines  on 
paper,  one  cannot  be  mistaken  for  either  of  the  other 
two  if  properly  tested.  The  downfall  of  the  forger  is 
often  due  to  his  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  fact  that 
black  inks  are  not  all  alike. 

The  iron-nutgall  ink  is  the  most  important  of  these 
three  classes  and  has  nearly  supplanted  all  other  kinds 
for  writings  of  importance.  Its  use  for  general  busi- 
ness purposes  is  almost  universal  and  it  is  used  almost 
exclusively  in  important  books  of  record.  It  seems  to 
be  well  established  that  this  ink  in  its  present  form  was 


332  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

first  made  commercially  by  Stephens  in  1856.  It  differs 
from  similar  ink  used  before  that  time  in  that  it  is  a 
true  chemical  solution  as  distinguished  from  a  similar 
combination  of  ingredients  with  part  of  the  coloring 
matter  or  precipitate  held  in  suspension.  Because  of  its 
extreme  fluidity  this  ink  of  the  modern  type  penetrates 
the  fiber  of  the  paper,  where  it  blackens  and  thus  actu- 
ally makes  its  record  partly  in  the  body  of  the  paper 
instead  of  simply  on  its  surface,  as  is  the  case  with  inks 
that  are  not  true  solutions. 

As  is  well  known  these  iron-nutgall  fluids  are  not 
immediately  black  when  used  but  contain  a  temporary 
blue  color  which  makes  them  legible  until  the  sulphate 
of  iron  and  gallic  acid  turn  black,  and  the  permanent 
and  final  color  of  the  ink  is  formed,  consisting  of  what 
is  described  as  black  tannate  and  gallate  of  iron.  This 
lack  of  initial  blackness  is  a  defect  in  fluid  inks  that  the 
most  skilful  chemists  have  not  yet  been  able  to  remedy. 
Other  objections  to  this  ink  are  that  the  slight  excess 
of  acid  it  contains,  in  order  to  keep  the  iron  in  chemical 
solution,  corrodes  steel  pens,  and  also  that  writing  done 
with  it  is  readily  removed  by  the  application  of  simple 
chemicals,  thus  rendering  it  easy  fraudulently  to  change 
documents  written  with  it.  The  characteristics  of  this 
ink  that  have  made  it  popular  are  its  excellent  flowing 
quality,  its  ultimate  blackness  and  permanent  color  im- 
bedded in  the  paper  fiber,  and  especially  its  excellent 
keeping  qualities  before  being  used. 

Logwood  ink  of  the  potassium  chromate  type,  it  is 
said,  was  first  produced  commercially  in  1848.  This  ink 
is  a  saturated  solution  of  logwood  to  which  a  very  small 
quantity  of  potassium-chromate  is  added  forming  a 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  333 

purple-black  fluid  which  turns  slightly  darker  on  the 
paper.  Logwood  extract  is  sometimes  combined  with 
other  ingredients  to  make  other  kinds  of  inks  that  are, 
however,  but  little  used. 

Nigrosine  ink  is  made  by  dissolving  in  water  a  coal- 
tar  product,  called  nigrosine,  which  makes  a  blue-black 
ink  that  flows  freely  but  does  not  turn  darker  on  the 
paper  like  iron-nutgall  ink,  and  is  easily  smudged  or 
affected  by  dampness  even  after  it  has  been  on  the 
paper  a  long  time.  Nigrosine  was  first  produced  com- 
mercially in  1867  and  writing  with  ink  of  this  class  dated 
before  that  time  is  either  fraudulent  or  incorrectly  dated. 

The  various  kinds  of  ink  in  use  each  have  desirable 
qualities.  All  carbon  inks  and  inks  of  the  India  class, 
not  heretofore  described,  are  exceedingly  permanent 
and  very  black  and  cannot  be  removed  by  chemicals, 
but  being  too  thick  and  heavy  to  flow  freely  and  thus 
undesirable  for  ordinary  writing,  are  but  little  used. 
Logwood  ink  is  inexpensive,  does  not  corrode  steel  pens, 
will  not  wash  off  the  paper  even  when  fresh,  flows  freely 
and  is  nearly  black  when  first  written,  but  it  does  not 
keep  well.  Nigrosine  ink  does  not  corrode  steel  pens, 
is  nearly  black  when  first  written  and  flows  freely,  but 
it  never  reaches  the  deep  black  color  of  good  iron-nut- 
gall  ink  and,  as  already  stated,  is  easily  affected  by  water 
or  dampness  at  any  time. 

The  composition  of  inks  in  writings  on  paper  is  de- 
termined by  the  application  of  various  chemical  reagents 
the  color  reactions  of  which  are  known  as  applied  to  dif- 
ferent classes  of  inks.  In  this  manner  the  question^  is 
answered  whether  two  inks  belong  to  the  same  class. 
Enough  of  the  ingredients  of  an  ink  is  not  deposited 


334  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

on  the  paper  in  ordinary  writing  to  permit  a  quantitative 
chemical  analysis  to  be  made,  but  the  tests  by  reagents 
are  conclusive  within  certain  limits.  If  two  inks  give 
distinctly  different  reactions  in  response  to  the  same  test 
this  indicates  conclusively  that  the  inks  are  not  the  same, 
though  it  cannot  be  definitely  shown  what  all  the  in- 
gredients of  the  inks  actually  are,  and  if  two  inks  give 
the  same  response  under  several  different  reagents  this 
shows  that  they  belong  to  the  same  class  even  though  it 
cannot  be  shown  that  they  are  necessarily  identical  in 
proportions  of  ingredients. 

The  two  most  useful  reagents  are  chemically  pure 
hydrochloric  and  oxalic  acids  in  from  five  to  fifteen 
per  cent,  solutions.  They  are  easily  obtained  and  only 
a  small  quantity  is  necessary.  Logwood  ink  and  iron- 
nutgall  ink  are  conclusively  differentiated  by  the  hydro- 
chloric test.  Under  this  reagent  iron-nutgall  ink  gives 
a  distinct  blue  or  blue-green  reaction  and  logwood 
ink  gives  a  distinct  red  or  purple-red  reaction,  the  re- 
sults being  so  distinctively  different  (Fig.  145)  that 
they  are  unmistakable. 

Inks  containing  iron  are  also  distinguished  by  the 
application  of  ferrocyanide  of  potash,  which  when  ap- 
plied to  such  inks  instantly  produces  a  characteristic 
bright  blue  reaction.  Care  should  be  taken  to  be  sure 
that  this  reaction  is  from  the  ink  and  not  from  the  paper. 

Oxalic  acid  applied  to  iron-nutgall  inks  or  logwood 
inks  bleaches  or  removes  them  entirely,  but  this  reagent 
has  but  little  if  any  effect  on  nigrosine  ink  except  to 
make  its  color  somewhat  brighter  temporarily.  By  this 
test  nigrosine  ink  and  also  carbon  ink  are  conclusively 
differentiated  from  logwood  inks  and  iron  inks.  Iron- 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


335 


nutgall  ink  and  logwood  ink  are  also  differentiated 
from  nigrosine  ink  by  applying  water  or  alcohol.  Nigro- 
sine  ink,  being  merely  a  stain  obtained  from  nigrosine 
dissolved  in  water,  is  easily  dissolved  again  on  the  paper 
and  the  color  runs  or  spreads  out  when  any  fluid  is  ap- 
plied to  it.  Logwood  ink  is  not  affected  even  if  water 
is  applied  to  fresh  writing,  and  iron  inks  are  not  thus 


FIG*  145 — Ink  test  with  hydrochloric  acid  showing  one  part  of  overwritten 
figure  was  in  logwood  ink,  and  one  in  iron-nutgall  ink.    This  illustra- 
tion was  made  to  show  the  facts  in  a  case  where  it  was  claimed 
that  a  figure  "7"  was  first  made  and  a  figure  "4"  made  over 
it  at  once.    The  opposing  party  claimed  the  change 
was  made  long  after  for  a  fraudulent  purpose. 

affected  after  writing  has  been  on  the  paper  a  short  time.  / 

Nigrosine  ink  is  distinguished  from  carbon  ink  by 
the  application  of  a  bleaching  agent,  such  as  the  ordinary 
ink  eradicator,  which  bleaches  nigrosine  at  once  but  does 
not  affect  carbon  ink. 


336 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Nigrosine  ink  can 
often  be  quite  posi- 
tively identified  as 
such  by  a  microscopic 
examination.  Ink 
lines  made  with  this 
ink  have  peculiar 
dark  microscopic 
edges  like  a  very 
narrow  black  border, 
and  this  ink  also 
sometimes  has  a 
peculiar  metallic  lus- 
ter and  secondary 
color  when  observed 
at  a  certain  angle  of 
light1. 

Iron-nutgall  i  n  k 
cannot  ordinarily  be 

differentiated  from  logwood  ink  by  microscopic  exam- 
ination after  both  inks  have  reached  their  full  depth  of 
color,  and  some  nigrosine  inks  cannot  be  so  identified. 

'An  excellent  article  on  the  testing  of  inks,  "Zur  Methode  der 
Chemischen  Untersuchung  von  Tintenschrift,"  appeared  in  the  Septem- 
ber, 1908,  (Band  I.  Nr.  3)  of  "Archiv  Gerichtliche  Schriftuntersu- 
chungen  und  verwandte  Gebiete,"  a  magazine,  ably  edited  by  Dr. 
George  Meyer  and  Dr.  Hans  Schneickert  of  Berlin,  and  devoted  to  the 
discussion  of  subjects  relating  to  questioned  documents.  The  con- 
tribution on  the  subject  of  ink  is  by  Richard  Kynast,  Chief  Chemist 
of  Edward  Beyer's  great  Ink  Works  at  Chemnitz,  Germany,  and  is  a 
condensed,  clear  statement  of  the  leading  facts  on  the  subject  with 
directions  for  making  tests. 

Another  important  paper  on  ink  testing,  "English  Inks,  Their 
Composition  and  Differentiation  in  Handwriting,"  was  printed  in 
Analyst,  33,  80-5  London,  1908,  and  is  by  C.  A.  Mitchell,  one  of  the 
authors  of  the  English  book  on  the  subject,  entitled  "Inks,  Their 
Composition  and  Manufacture,"  London,  1904.  On  the  question  of 
qualities  of  various  inks  Mr.  Mitchell  finds:  "In  spite  of  probable 


FIG.  146 — A  nigrosine  ink  line  with  microscopic 

black  edges.     Actual  size  and 

enlarged  x  21. 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  337 

One  who  assumes  to  be  able  to  recognize  all  the  various 
kinds  of  ink  by  a  microscopic  examination  alone  is  either 
ignorant  or  pretends  to  do  what  cannot  be  done. 

The  second  question  regarding  ink,  as  outlined  at  the 
beginning  of  this  chapter,  is  usually  more  difficult  than 
the  first.  At  the  outset  it  should  be  understood  that  the 
writing  fluids  in  general  use  cannot  be  actually  identified 
and  distinguished  from  each  other  by  name  after  the 
ink  has  matured  on  the  paper,  although  it  may  be  pos- 
sible to  show  clearly  that  the  inks  on  several  documents 
or  on  different  parts  of  the  same  document  are  of  a  dif- 
ferent quality  or  were  in  different  conditions  when  the 
writing  was  done. 

These  fluid  inks  are  composed  of  certain  proportions 
of  iron  and  nutgall  chemical  solutions  with  a  very  small 
addition  of  gum  and  a  small  amount  of  carbolic  acid, 
or  some  other  preserving  agent,  and  an  aniline  blue 


similarity  in  methods  of  preparation  there  are  wide  variations,  the 
total  solids  varying-  from  1.89  to  7.94%,  ash  from  0.42  to  2.52%,  and 
iron  in  iron  gall  inks  from  0.18  to  1.09%." 

The  reagents  most  useful,  according  to  Mr.  Mitchell,  are:  (1) 
Hydrochloric  acid  (5%).  (2)  Oxalic  acid  (5%).  (3)  Stannous  chloride 
(10%).  (4)  Nascent  hydrogen  (50%  HC1  with  zinc).  (5)  Bromine 
(saturated  aqueous  solution).  (6)  Bleaching  powder  (saturated  solu- 
tion). (7)  Titanous  chloride  (the  impure  commercial  solution).  (8) 
Potassium  ferrocyanide  (5%  containing  1%  HC1).  Nos.  (1)  and  (2) 
act  mainly  upon  the  iron  tannate,  and  leave  the  provisional  coloring 
matter.  Nos.  (3)  and  (4)  bleach  the  iron  tannate  and  reduce  the 
provisional  pigment,  changing  its  color.  Nos.  (5)  and  (6)  may  act  on 
both  pigments,  causing  superficial  bleaching1.  No.  (7)  is  a  powerful 
reducing  agent  towards  both  pigments,  and  No.  (8)  acts  mainly  upon 
the  iron  liberated  from  the  iron  tannate. 

It  would  appear  from  certain  discussions  of  this  matter  of  ink 
testing  in  foreign  periodicals  that  there  is  much  greater  variety  in 
inks  of  the  same  class  than  in  this  country.  No  competent  American 
ink  chemist  would  undertake  to  do  with  American  inks  what,  for 
example,  Mr.  Mitchell  seems  to  have  done  with  English  inks.  Chemist 
Kynast  in  the  article  referred  to  above  voices  the  best  American  judg- 
ment on  the  matter  when  he  says:  "Ink  manufacturers  themselves 
would  be  unable  to  say,  with  certainty,  whether  a  certain  writing  is 
written  in  an  ink  of  their  make." 


338  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

temporary  color.  The  differences  between  them  are  due 
to  the  methods  of  compounding  and  the  care,  skill  and 
uniformity  with  which  they  are  made,  and  the  slight  dif- 
ferences in  proportions  cannot  be  accurately  determined 
from  the  small  amount  deposited  on  paper  in  actual 
writing.  Some  inks,  generally  speaking,  may  be  very 
superior  to  others,  in  strength,  in  uniformity,  in  cleanli- 
ness, but  with  a  comparatively  small  amount  of  writing 
in  question  it  is  almost  certainly  an  unwarranted  as- 
sumption to  say  positively  that  a  writing  was  produced 
with  a  certain  American  fluid  ink  made  by  a  particular 
manufacturer.  The  English  inks,  Stephens's  and 
Arnold's,  which  have  been  much  used  in  this  country,  are 
made  with  indigo  as  the  temporary  color  and  have  a  dis- 
tinct greenish  tint  before  maturity  or  under  the  hydro- 
chloric test,  and  while  they  cannot  ordinarily  be  dis- 
tinguished from  each  other,  they  can  sometimes  be  dis- 
tinguished from  fresh  American  inks  of  the  same  class1. 
While  a  chemical  test  is  the  most  conclusive  method  of 
differentiating  inks  actually  different  in  kind,  it  may 
be  the  most  ineffective  method  of  distinguishing  from 
each  other  inks  of  the  same  class.  A  chemical  test  of 
two  inks  not  identical  but  of  the  same  class  tends  to  show 
they  are  the  same  for  the  reason  that  the  chemical  re- 
actions would  be  substantially  alike.  Two  different  inks 
of  the  same  class  and  containing  the  same  chemical  in- 
gredients may  actually  differ  from  each  other  in  many 
ways  as  they  appear  in  the  form  of  writing  on  paper. 
The  most  common  difference  perhaps  is  that  due  to  the 

1A  bottle  of  Stephens's  ink  bought  during  the  preparation  of  this 
chapter  shows  the  characteristic  blue  color  of  American  inks  indicat- 
ing the  use  of  aniline  blue  instead  of  indigo.  The  latest  Arnold  ink 
still  shows  the  pale  green  color. 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  839 

amount  of  water  present  or  the  thickness  or  thinness  of 
the  ink.  This  difference  may  be  caused  by  the  fact  that 
the  ink  has  more  solid  matter  in  it  from  the  beginning, 
or  water  may  have  disappeared  by  evaporation,  or,  in 
some  instances,  may  be  added  in  excess  by  the  user. 

Different  inks  of  the  same  class  are  distinguished 
from  each  other  by  differences ;  ( 1 )  in  depth  or  strength 
of  color,  (2)  in  range  of  color  or  contrast  between 
various  parts,  (3)  by  variation  in  tint  of  the  ink  as  a 
whole  due  to  chemical  changes  after  the  inks  are  com- 
pounded, (4)  in  secondary  color  by  oblique  reflected 
light,  (5)  in  margin  of  the  stroke  whether  clearcut  or 
feathered,  (6)  in  penetration  or  degree  it  is  absorbed 
into  or  shows  through  the  paper,  (7)  color  of  blotted 
strokes  or  smeared  portions,  (8)  in  amount  of  sediment 
or  precipitate  shown  in  thin  strokes,  (9)  in  gloss  or 
sheen.  Some  of  these  conditions  are  related  somewhat, 
but  a  careful  detailed  examination  under  these  nine 
heads  may  show  differences  that  are  indisputable. 

Depth  and  range  of  color  should  be  compared  by  ex- 
amination of  the  wTiting  as  a  whole  and  then  by  com- 
paring with  each  other  the  lightest,  the  medium,  and  the 
darkest  portions  in  the  two  writings.  It  can  often  be 
shown  that  one  of  two  inks  of  the  same  general  tint 
has  a  much  greater  range  of  color  either  in  the  direction 
of  lightness  or  darkness,  a  difference  which  is  due  to  a 
slight  difference  in  the  consistency  or  fluidity  of  the  two 
inks.  Two  inks  may  be  the  same  in  appearance  except 
that  one  is  never  at  any  place  of  as  deep  a  color  as  the 
other  and  one  may  show  delicate  tints  on  thin  films  of 
ink,  especially  on  beginning  strokes,  that  cannot  be 
found  in  the  other  at  any  place. 


340  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

These  inks  are  intended  to  be  true  solutions,  that  is, 
without  precipitate  or  suspended  matter,  but  they  often 
show  marked  differences  in  this  regard  depending  upon 
the  skill  with  which  they  were  made,  their  age,  and 
especially  upon  the  kind  of  vessel  in  which  they  have 
been  kept.  By  oxidation  before  use  a  fluid  ink  may 
develop  a  very  perceptible  sediment  in  the  form  of 
thousands  of  dark  particles  which  are  plainly  shown  in 
every"  thin  ink  line  made  with  it  as  seen  on  the  back- 
ground of  the  light  tint.  Sediment  may  be  dust  that 
has  fallen  into  the  ink  and  become  mixed  with  it,  but 
usually  comes  from  the  ink  itself.  It  is  much  more 
apparent  if  writings  are  made  from  ink  kept  in  one  of 
the  plunger  or  patent  ink  wells  in  which  each  operation 
of  dipping  the  pen  stirs  up  the  ink  from  the  bottom  of 
the  well.  These  ink  wells  probably  also  tend  to  develop 
sediment  by  the  constant  operation  of  alternate  wetting 
and  drying  of  quite  a  large  surface  at  the  opening  of 
the  well  and  the  continual  washing  of  the  dried  portions 
of  the  ink  back  into  the  receptacle.  The  presence  or 
absence  of  sediment  is  easily  shown  with  the  microscope 
under  comparatively  low  magnification  (see  Fig.  30) 
and  does  not  require  that  an  observer  shall  be  specially 
skilled  in  order  to  see  these  facts. 

The  great  variation  and  range  of  color  of  ordinary 
iron-nutgall  inks  are  partly  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
color  of  the  ink  gradually  changes  in  the'  bottle  before 
it  is  used  from  a  bright  blue  to  a  green  and  then  to  a 
greenish  yellow,  these  changes  being  governed  by  the 
method  of  compounding,  the  original  proportions  of  in- 
gredients, and  the  conditions  under  which  the  ink  is  kept. 
In  perpetrating  a  fraud  it  thus  often  becomes  difficult 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  341 

to  match  exactly  the  color  of  a  previous  writing  and  it 
is  not  the  simple  operation  of  finding  a  bottle  with  a 
similar  label,  even  if  it  is  well  knowrn  what  the  ink  is 
that  is  to  be  matched.  As  was  said  above,  ordinary  writ- 
ing fluid  is  colored  or  given  its  initial  blue  color  by  the 
addition  of  aniline  blue,  and  ink  makers  do  not  seem  to 
be  able  to  make  ink  of  this  kind  that  will  remain  in- 
definitely the  same  color  before  being  used.  Fresh  ink 
will  usually  differ  distinctly  in  initial  color  from  ink  that 
is  two  years  old  and  in  three  years  it  may  change  in  the 
bottle  so  that  it  looks  like  an  entirely  different  ink. 

In  comparing  inks  examination  should  first  be  made 
with  the  naked  eye  in  good  daylight  and  then  with  hand 
magnifiers,  and  finally  with  the  color  microscope.  A 
thorough  examination  of  this  kind  sometimes  requires 
that  careful  chemical  tests  be  made  of  inks  which  are 
being  compared.  All  such  tests  on  a  questioned  docu- 
ment should  be  delicately  and  carefully  made  and  the 
exact  location,  nature  and  the  results  of  the  tests  should 
be  recorded  at  the  time.  If  proper  methods  are  em- 
ployed chemical  reagents  can  be  applied  so  that  docu- 
ments are  not  only  not  injured,  defaced  nor  obliterated 
but  so  that  without  the  microscope  it  cannot  be  observed 
that  any  tests  have  been  made. 

The  reagents  should  be  applied  with  finely  pointed 
instruments  made  from  quill  or  wood.  When  the  test 
is  made  a  microscope  with  low  power  objective  or  mag- 
nifying glass  mounted  on  a  stand  should  be  focused  on 
the  spot  to  be  tested  so  that  a  very  small  quantity  of  the 
reagent  may  be  accurately  applied  to  an  unimportant 
and  inconspicuous  part  of  a  pen  stroke.  An  area  larger 
than  the  size  of  a  small  pin-head  should  not  be  covered, 


342  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

and  a  second  application  may  be  made  to  the  same  spot 
if  necessary  until  a  definite  color  reaction  is  clearly 
shown.  A  clean  white  blotter  should  be  applied  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  test  and  it  is  usually  well  to  apply  a 
small  quantity  of  clean  water  several  times  to  the  por- 
tion tested,  taking  up  the  water  each  time  by  the  im- 
mediate application  of  a  clean  blotter.  If  this  is  care- 
fully done  the  chemical  reagents  can  be  almost  entirely 
removed  from  the  paper  and  no  perceptible  discoloration 
will  follow. 

Very  minute  tests  can  be  made,  by  using  the  micro- 
scope as  described  above,  so  that  the  document  shows 
practically  no  effects  of  the  tests.  Tests  should  always 
be  made  in  good  daylight,  and  the  result  should  always 
be  observed  under  proper  magnification,  and  usually 
more  than  one  portion  should  be  tested.  Especially  in 
signature  inquiries  even  these  very  minute  chemical 
tests  should  not  ordinarily  be  made  on  a  document  of  the 
adverse  party  without  consent.  Such  a  chemical  test 
might  be  misconstrued  or  might  slightly  change  some 
writing  characteristic. 

In  making  a  visual  comparison  of  the  ink  of  two  writ- 
ings a  superficial  or  hasty  examination  may  easily  lead 
to  a  wrong  conclusion.  The  exact  tint  of  a  small  mass 
of  any  substance  is  not  easily  recognizable  by  the  un- 
aided eye,  and,  as  already  seen,  ink  colors  should  always 
be  compared  under  proper  magnification  with  a  good 
microscope.  As  it  is  difficult  if  not  impossible  for  most 
observers  to  carry  in  the  eye  a  tint  or  shade  even  for  a 
very  short  space  of  time,  two  ink  lines  to  be  compared 
should  always  be  observed  at  the  same  time.  This  is 
possible  with  the  double  objective  color  microscope, 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  343 

described  hereafter,  or  with  an  ordinary  microscope  the 
same  purpose  may  be  accomplished  if  it  is  possible  to 
bring  the  two  lines  close  together  into  the  same  field. 
Examination  and  comparison  should  always  be  made  in 
good  daylight  but  not  in  direct  sunlight. 

Care  should  always  be  taken  not  to  decide  hastily  that 
two  writings  are  with  two  different  inks  when  one  has 
been  blotted  and  the  other  not.  A  blotted  ink  stroke 
looks  very  different  from  one  made  with  the  same  ink 
and  unblotted,  although  this  does  not  make  it  impossible 
to  say  that  the  writings  were  or  were  not  actually  made 
with  different  inks.  It  is  usually  possible  to  tell  whether 
a  blotter  was  applied  by  comparing  the  first  and  last 
portions  of  the  word,  signature  or  line.  The  very  last 
part  of  a  blotted  writing  almost  certainly  wTill  be  lighter 
than  the  beginning  part  because  ink  is  partly  absorbed 
into  ordinary  paper  in  a  few  seconds,  and  more  of  the 
ink  of  the  last  part  of  the  writing  will  quite  certainly 
be  taken  up  by  the  blotter  than  of  the  beginning  por- 
tions. Where  the  blotter  is  applied  somewhat  slowly 
only  the  heavily  shaded  portions  may  show  its  effect. 
Blotted  iron-nutgall  ink  shows  yellow  discoloration  due 
to  age  much  sooner  than  unblotted  ink,  and  will  fade 
and  become  illegible  much  earlier.  A  blotter  should 
never  be  applied  to  important  writing  of  any  kind. 

The  apparent  color  and  age  of  ink  are  changed  by 
the  color,  condition  and  character  of  the  paper  upon 
which  it  is  placed,  and  this  point  must  be  considered 
when  the  inks  on  different  documents,  written  on  differ- 
ing papers,  or  ink  on  different  parts  of  the  same  docu- 
ment, when  the  parts  are  in  different  conditions,  are 
compared.  Writing  on  old  yellow  paper  may  look  dis- 


344  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

tinctly  aged  and  the  appearance  may  be  almost  wholly 
due  to  the  paper  and  not  to  the  ink.  An  imitation  of  an 
old  document  may  have  an  old  look  due  almost  entirely 
to  the  old  paper  used.  If  genuine  old  documents  are 
compared  with  such  a  paper  the  difference  in  the  actual 
condition  of  really  old  ink  and  fresh  ink  will  usually  be 
apparent  at  once. 

The  depth  of  color  in  an  ink  line  is  also  governed  in 
a  measure  by  the  amount  applied  at  any  point  or  the 
thickness  of  the  ink  film.  In  any  considerable  quantity 
of  writing  and  usually  in  even  a  short  signature  three 
depths  of  color  can  be  found  and  compared;  first,  the 
very  thinnest  lines  as  at  the  beginning  and  ends  of 
strokes;  second,  the  average  unshaded  normal  strokes; 
third,  the  shaded  strokes,  or  any  portions  where  there 
is  a  thick  ink  film  as  at  angles  or  loops  where  the  wet 
ink  from  the  pen  has  flowed  back  on  the  previous  line 
just  made.  If  the  ink  film  is  very  thick  it  may  be  dif- 
ficult to  make  an  exact  color  reading  of  it.  As  colors 
approach  black  it  becomes  more  difficult  to  differentiate 
them  so  that  the  medium  and  the  thinner  portions  of  ink 
lines  may  furnish  a  better  basis  for  comparison  of  tints 
than  the  dense  and  darker  portions. 

Black  inks  may  be  very  nearly  identical  except  that 
one  may  have  a  slight  blue  tinge,  another  a  purple  tinge 
and  a  third  a  yellow,  brown,  or  red  tinge.  In  inquiries 
regarding  interlineations  or  the  continuity  of  writing  it 
may  be  very  important  to  differentiate  these  inks  in  the 
most  positive  and  conclusive  manner.  This  can  some- 
times be  done  by  means  of  photography.  A  photographic 
analysis  of  these  slightly  varying  colors  sometimes  will 
show  conclusively  wrhat  may  be  but  a  very  slight  differ- 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  345 

ence  in  two  inks.  This  is  accomplished  by  measuring 
the  comparative  chemical  effect  of  light  of  different 
colors  by  means  of  the  sensitized  photographic  plate. 

As  is  positively  exemplified  in  the  three  color  photo- 
graphic process  this  analysis  shows  a  difference  in  the 
colors  as  real  as  the  chemical  difference  in  two  sub- 
stances of  any  kind.  Analysis  is  made  by  photograph- 
ing the  writings  through  color  screens  or  light  filters 
(Figs.  27,  147)  which  allow  only  certain  colors  to  pass 
and  to  affect  the  sensitized  plate.  If  it  is  desired  to 
emphasize  one  of  the  slightly  differing  colors  in  two 
writings  in  the  black  and  white  reproduction  on  the  re- 
sulting print,  a  filter  is  used  which  is  complementary 
in  color  and  does  not  allow  that  color  to  pass  or  allows 
it  to  pass  only  feebly ;  and  to  reduce  a  tint  or  to  weaken 
a  color  a  filter  is  employed  of  a  color  similar  to  that  to 
be  reduced,  which  allows  the  light  to  pass  freely,  so 
forming  a  thick  deposit  on  the  negative  which  will  as  a 
result  make  a  light  print.  Both  writings  are  photo- 
graphed together  on  the  same  plate,  developed  together 
and  printed  together  under  exactly  the  same  conditions, 
and  if  the  two  writings  do  actually  differ  in  color  this 
process  will  show  it  plainly.  By  the  use  of  ordinary, 
orthochromatic,  and  panchromatic  plates  and  appropri- 
ate light  filters  any  desired  photographic  color  compari- 
son or  analysis  can  be  made.  Each  particular  case  of 
comparison  must  first  be  studied  in  good  daylight  and 
worked  out  by  itself  with  the  microscope1. 

aThere  are  shown  in  Fig.  147  five  photographs  of  standard  colors 
from  the  beautiful  Prang-  &  Co.  colored  plate  under  "spectrum"  in 
the  Standard  Dictionary.  Some  of  the  finer  gradation  of  tint  is  lost  in 
the  half-tone  but  this  illustration  shows  clearly  what  command  of  the 
situation  the  photographer  has  by  a  proper  selection  of  plates  and  light 
filters.  Plate  No.  1  shows  plainly  why  the  ordinary  photographer  has 


346  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  third  question  regarding  ink,  or  that  of  con- 
tinuity, is  sometimes  of  great  importance  and  requires 
very  careful  consideration.  The  condition  of  the  ink 
as  it  appears  on  suspected  papers  may  be  of  distinct 
value  as  evidence  showing  whether  two  or  more  docu- 
ments, purporting  to  have  been  written  at  different  times, 
were  not  in  fact  all  written  at  the  same  time.  The  con- 
dition, uniformity  and  age  of  ink  must  also  be  carefully 
considered  in  the  examination  of  records,  or  book-entries, 
which  are  suspected  of  having  been  written  fraudulently 
at  one  time  instead  of  having  been  entered  in  due  course 
of  business  on  the  several  dates  they  bear.  Such  entries 
may  show  an  unnatural  uniformity  when  they  purport 
to  have  been  written  on  widely  differing  dates  and  neces- 
sarily under  varying  conditions,  even  when  the  same  ink 
is  admittedly  used  throughout.  If  numerous  entries 
purporting  to  be  written  at  different  times  and  on  widely 
divergent  dates  all  show  exactly  the  same  ink  color  and 
condition  this  may  be  a  very  suspicious  circumstance. 
This  question  is  more  fully  discussed  in  a  subsequent 
chapter  treating  of  additions  and  interlineations. 


difficulty  in  photographing  blue  or  purple  or  any  color  on  a  red  or 
orange  paper  or  background.  It  will  be  seen  that  any  of  the  standard 
colors  can  be  reduced  or  intensified,  thus  making  it  possible  to  photo- 
graph any  kind  of  questioned  document  written  in  any  color  of  ink 
and  on  any  color  of  paper. 

In  No.  1  it  will  be  seen  that  red  and  orange  are  darkest  and  blue 
lightest,  while  in  No.  2  blue  is  darkest  and  yellow  is  lightest.  In  No.  3 
yellow  is  darkest  and  in  No.  4  yellow  and  green  are  lightest  while  in 
No.  5  the  opposite  end  of  the  spectrum  is  light  as  compared  with  No.  1, 
and  blue  is  the  darkest  color  as  photographed. 

Much  valuable  information  on  the  subject  of  color  photography 
may  be  found  in  "Three-Color  Photography,"  by  Von  Hiibl,  (Vienna). 
English  translation  by  Klein. — Penrose  &  Co.,  London,  1904. 


FIG.  147— Five  photographs  of  the  same  colors  with  different  plates  and  light  filters. 

[347] 


348  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

The  Age  of  Ink. 

In  discussing  the  fourth  inquiry  regarding  ink  as 
outlined  at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter,  the  question 
of  its  age,  it  may  be  best  to  consider  first  what  cannot 
be  done  and  what  cannot  be  shown.  After  iron-nutgall 
ink  has  been  on  paper  long  enough  to  mature  and  reach 
its  darkest  color  it  is  not  possible  by  any  method  to  ascer- 
tain with  much  accuracy  how  old  it  is  until  it  begins  to 
show  evidence  of  the  yellow  discoloration  which  ordinar- 
ily indicates  that  it  has  been  on  the  paper  more  than  from 
seven  to  ten  years.  To  say  that  one  writing  with  this 
ink  is  three  years  old  and  another  four  and  another  five, 
judging  from  the  ink  alone,  is  almost  certainly  an  un- 
warranted assumption,  although  it  may  be  ver^  clear 
that  not  one  of  these  inks  is  as  old  as  another  ink  that 
has  been  on  a  paper  ten,  fifteen,  or  twenty  years.  If 
iron-nutgall  and  logwood  inks  have  been  on  the  paper 
a  long  time  they  do  not  respond  so  quickly  to  chemical 
reagents  as  ink  not  so  old,  and  comparative  age  may 
thus  be  determined  in  a  general  way  but  not  very  ac- 
curately. Definite  statements  as  to  comparative  ages  of 
writings  based  on  such  tests  alone  should  be  received 
with  great  caution  unless  the  tests  show  that  the  inks  are 
of  very  widely  differing  dates1. 

aDr.  Dennstedt,  the  celebrated  chemist,  director  of  the  State 
Chemical  Laboratory,  at  Hamburg,  Germany,  in  his  excellent  treatise 
on  "The  Proof  of  Forged  Manuscripts,  etc."  (Der  Nachweis  von  Schrift- 
falschungen  usw.),  says  (p.  97): 

"The  chemical  examinations  for  the  purpose  of  deciding  the  age 
of  a  manuscript  according  to  our  knowledge  were  first  made  use  of 
by  Sonnenschein.  According  to  him  the  differences  in  time  shown 
in  responding  to  chemical  applications,  as  measured  by  the  stop  watch, 
would  indicate  different  ages.  It  is  true  very  old  ink  responds  less 
rapidly  than  younger  ink  to  chemical  application.  The  conclusion 
regarding  the  age  is  only  then  allowable  and  even  then  only  condi- 
tionally if  it  is  a  question  about  the  same  ink.  If  the  two  inks  are 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  349 

If  a  writing  was  done  with  a  purple,  blue,  or  red  ink 
or  with  a  black  nigrosine  ink1,  it  is  not  ordinarily  possible 
to  tell* from  the  ink  alone  how  old  it  is.  But  it  may  be  pos- 
sible to  determine  that  a  very  recent  writing  with  some 
of  these  inks  was  written  after  a  very  old  writing  with 
a  similar  ink,  for  the  reason  that  in  an  investigation  of 

not  identical  any  judgment  is  unreliable  in  spite  of  the  scientific  ap- 
pearance of  the  method  of  using-  the  stop  watch.  One  must  therefore 
make  use  of  this  process  very  seldom  and  always  with  greatest  care." 

Fresh  inks  give  a  better  copy  than  old  inks  and  it  has  been 
proposed  that  a  press  copy  be  made  to  show  whether  one  ink  is  older 
than  another.  The  method  is  a  dangerous  one  and  often  entirely 
inconclusive.  If  it  is  known  positively  that  the  two  writings  are  with 
the  same  ink  and  that  the  ink  will  give  a  copy  after  it  has  been  on  the 
paper  as  long  as  the  most  recent  writing  has  been  written,  and  the 
conditions  surrounding  both  writings  \vere  the  same,  then  it  may  be 
advisable  to  try  the  copying  test. 

^olyr  readings  of  nigrosine  black  ink  on  bleached,  white  rag  paper, 
covering  four  years'  time,  made  with  the  Color  Microscope  described 
on  pages  following,  show  the  following  results: 

Red  Yellow  Blue 

Thirty  minutes  1.6  .90  3.6 

One   year,    one    month  1.6  .90  3.6 

Four  years,   six  months  1.6  .90  3.6 

The  reading  of  a  similar  ink  by  a  different  manufacturer  on  Decem- 
ber 30,  1903,  was  Red  1.6,  Yellow  1,  Blue  3.6,  and  after  six  years  the 
reading  is  just  the  same. 

The  color  reading  of  good  logwood  ink  is  very  nearly  like  nigrosine 
but  usually  has  a  little  more  red  so  that  the  visual  color  is  a  deeper 
purple.  These  inks  can  usually  be  recognized  by  these  colors  and  can 
be  distinguished  from  each  other  because  the  nigrosine  ink  has  the 
peculiar,  black  microscopic  margins.  An  initial  reading  of  a  good 
logwood  ink  in  good  condition  gives:  Red  1.9,  Yellow  .90,  Blue  3.4 
and  the  same  ink  after  three  years  gives:  Red  1.8,  Yellow  1.5,  Blue  3. 
It  will  be  observed  that  the  nigrosine  ink  has  not  changed  and  the  log- 
wood only  slightly,  having  grown  somewhat  darker  in  shade  by  an 
increase  in  the  yellow. 

In  the  readings  tabulated  only  the  constituent  colors  directly  from 
the  glasses  are  given.  The  visual  colors  obviously  are  not  the  same 
as  the  constituent  colors,  as  equal  parts  of  blue  and  yellow  would 
visually  be  green,  and  red  and  blue  would  be  violet. 

Three  glasses  of  the  same  value  give  not  a  tint  but  a  shade,  so  the 
lowest  in  a  combination  of  three  we  read  as  neutral  or  black.  In  a 
reading  of  Red  1.,  Yellow  .90,  Blue  5.60  there  would  be,  for  example, 
black  .90  and  .10  red  excess  to  combine  with  the  blue,  giving  a  violet 
of  .10,  and  leaving  an  excess  of  4.60  blue  above  the  sum  of  the  two 
other  visual  constituents.  The  predominant  color  is  of  course  blue 
tinged  with  violet  and  shaded  or  damped  with  the  .90  of  yellow  which 
does  not  appear  as  a  tint.  The  visual  reading  therefore  is  Black  .90, 
Violet  .10,  Blue  4.60. 


350  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

this  kind  other  questions  than  color  may  enter  into  the 
inquiry.  Old  and  recent  writings  with  logwood  ink  can 
sometimes  be  differentiated,  but  this  cannot  alwa'ys  be 
V  done.  Nigrosine  ink  writing  an  hour  old  does  not  differ 
materially  in  any  way  from  writing  with  the  same  ink 
one,  two  or  three  years  old.  Nigrosine  inks  are  not  all 
of  the  same  quality  and,  therefore,  may  differ  from  each 
other  somewhat  in  appearance,  but  the  ink  does  not 
change  on  the  paper  to  a  sufficient  extent  to  warrant  any 
opinion  as  to  its  age  unless  it  be  very  old. 

It  is  sometimes  very  important  to  determine  the  age 
of  an  ordinary  lead  pencil  writing,  or  the  comparative 
ages  of  two  such  writings,  but  unfortunately  this  cannot 
be  done.  One  who  undertakes  to  do  it,  or  to  say  that 
one  pencil  writing  is  "more  than  a  year  old,"  and  an- 
other "less  than  a  year  old,"  may  safely  be  set  down  as 
a  pretender  and  unworthy  of  belief. 

Fortunately  it  is  possible  to  answer  definitely  one  in- 
quiry of  the  most  vital  interest  in  connection  with  the 
age  of  ink  and  its  bearing  on  the  genuineness  of  a  dis- 
puted document  and  that  is  whether  it  has  yet  matured 
and  reached  its  fullest  depth  of  color.  In  many  cases 
it  has  been  positively  known  that  the  ink  on  a  disputed 
document  purporting  to  be  many  years  of  age,  has 
matured  or  "turned  black"  after  the  paper  has  been 
brought  into  court,  but  such  a  statement  based  on  mere 
recollection  is  of  little  value  as  evidence.  There  has  long 
been  great  need  of  some  means  by  which  ink  colors 
under  the  above  conditions  could  be  accurately  measured 
\  and  recorded.  In  most  cases  it  is  a  dangerous  under- 
taking for  anyone  to  make  one  examination  of  an  ink 
and  venture  to  say  just  how  old  it  is,  unless  it  is  very 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  351 

recent  or  very  old,  but  by  recording  the  color  as  first  seen 
any  observer  with  good  eyesight  can  answer  the  question 
whether  an  ink  is  still  undergoing  a  change  in  color. 

In  the  natural  course  of  events  a  fraudulent  document 
is  manufactured  only  a  short  time  before  it  is  actually 
brought  forward,  and  the  conditions  often  require  that 
such  a  paper  be  dated  back  many  months  or  even  many 
years.  Fortunately  the  ink  in  most  common  use,  iron- 
nutgall  ink,  goes  through  more  changes  on  the  paper 
than  any  other  ink  and  is  most  affected  by  lapse  of  time, 
and  these  facts  may  be  of  great  importance  in  the  in- 
vestigation of  a  suspected  document.  It  is  highly  im- 
portant to  know  that  the  color  of  the  ink  on  such  a  docu- 
ment may  be  the  means  of  showing  that  it  is  not  genuine. 
If  a  writing  of  this  kind  purports  to  have  been  written 
long  before  and  it  can  be  conclusively  shown  that  the  ink 
has  not  yet  matured,  and  that  it  actually  goes  through 
those  changes  that  are  characteristic  of  ink  during  the 
first  few  months  of  its  history,  it  is  only  necessary  to 
prove  these  facts  to  invalidate  such  a  paper. 

The  fact  that  ordinary  fluid  ink  changes  color  has 
naturally  received  some  attention  in  the  examination  of 
questioned  documents  purporting  to  be  written  long  be- 
fore, but  there  has  been  no  means  of  making  an  accurate 
and  permanent  record  of  the  tint  and  shade  of  the  ink 
for  subsequent  comparison  with  itself.  The  important 
fact  is  that  the  iron-nutgall  inks  in  common  use  reach 
their  fullest  intensity  of  blackness  by  a  continuous 
process  of  oxidation,  and  this  chemical  action  cannot  be 
entirely  arrested  to  be  resumed  and  completed  at  a  re- 
mote period  of  time.  The  facts  about  the  time  required 
for  these  changes  of  color  are  not  generally  understood. 


352 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


It  is  essential  to  know  the  rate  of  development  of  such 
changes  and  also  when  they  are  entirely  completed. 

The  first  steps  in  the  darkening  of  these  inks  are  much 
more  rapid  than  the  later  ones.    A  good  ink  in  summer 


FIG.  148— Iron-Nutgall  Ink  Chart. 

under  ordinary  view  will  appear  to  be  black  at  the  end 
of  from  one  to  two  weeks  and  in  winter  this  degree  of 
blackness  will  be  reached  in  from  six  to  eighteen  weeks, 
but  in  both  cases  the  ink  is  then  far  from  black  and  a 
very  long  way  from  its  ultimate  condition.  This  first 
apparent  blackness  is  not  blackness  at  all,  but,  under 
proper  magnification  and  good  daylight,  is  seen  to  be  a 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  353 

rich  blue-purple  color  at  its  densest  portions,  shading 
off  into  light  blue  in  the  thin  places1.  This  blue  gradually 
disappears  and  the  purple  gradually  deepens  until  the 
ink  finally  reaches  a  neutral  black  without  any  purple  or 
blue  color  whatever.  This  latter  process  is  very  slow 
and  oftens  covers  many  months,  the  time  depending 
upon  the  surrounding  conditions,  the  quality  of  the  ink, 
and  the  kind  of  paper  upon  which  it  is  placed. 

The  time  required  for  fresh  iron-nutgall  ink  of  good 
quality  to  reach  a  neutral  black  is  from  about  fourteen 
to  twenty-four  months.  After  this  ink  reaches  its  fullest 
intensity  of  color  it  remains  in  a  practically  fixed  condi- 
tion for  some  years,  approximately  six  to  ten,  and  then 
it  begins  to  show  slight  yellow  discoloration  on  the  edges 
of  the  pen  strokes.  This  discoloration  is  progressive 
until  after  a  sufficient  lapse  of  time,  depending  upon 
conditions,  the  ink  finally  all  becomes  a  yellowish  brown 
color.  Iron-nutgall  ink  may  be  so  old  before  being  used 
that  it  has  turned  yellow  in  the  bottle  and  writing  with 
such  ink  may  be  a  distinct  yellow  color  in  a  short  time. 

As  we  have  seen,  iron-nutgall  ink  color  develops  much 


aln  January,  1910,  color  readings  were  made  from  nine  different 
commercial  iron-nutgall  inks  all  purchased  in  the  open  market  on  the 
same  day.  It  is  true  that  some  of  these  inks  because  of  age  may  have 
degenerated  in  the  bottle  but  most  of  them  were  apparently  only  a 
few  months  old. 

The  results  of  color  readings  of  these  inks  on  pure  white  paper 
after  forty-eight  hours  are  as  follows: 

Red  Yellow  Blue 

No.  1  .80  .70  5.8 

No.  2  .40  .70  5.8 

No.  3  .40  .44  5. 

No.  4  .38  .50  4.8 

No.  5  .40  .38  4.6 

No.  7  .38  .44  4.4 

No.  6  .38  .44  4.6 

No.  8  .80  .90  4.6 

No.  9  .60  1.20  3.6 


354  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

slower  in  winter  than  in  summer.  The  most  rapid  change 
is  during  the  warm,  humid  months,  the  humidity  un- 
doubtedly affecting  the  change  much  more  than  the  heat. 
In  the  months  of  July  and  August  an  iron-nutgall  ink 
will  reach  a  degree  of  blackness  in  ten  days  that  will 
hardly  be  reached  by  the  same  ink  on  the  same  paper  in 
ten  weeks  in  winter  in  northern  latitudes  where  artificial 
heat  takes  a  large  percentage  of  the  humidity  out  of  the 
air.  This  varying  rapidity  of  development  is  a  fact  al- 
ways to  be  taken  into  consideration  in  such  an  examina- 
tion. If  a  fraudulent  paper  is  made  during  the  winter 
months  there  is  a  much  longer  interval  during  which  a 
color  examination  of  the  ink  may  be  useful  in  ascertain- 
ing the  actual  date  of  the  document. 

Even  under  conditions  producing  the  very  slowest 
development  iron-nutgall  inks  lose  most  of  their  dis- 
tinctive initial  color  in  a  few  months  and  usually  in  a 
few  weeks  or  even  days.  The  blue  or  green  tints  do 
not  fade,  but  are  gradually  extinguished  by  the  develop- 
ment of  the  darker  developed  colors  of  the  iron-nutgall 
solutions1.  The  first  part  of  the  process,  the  dulling  or 
extinguishing  of  the  distinctive  bright  blue  color,  is  com- 
paratively rapid,  as  we  have  seen,  but  the  completion 
of  the  entire  process  covers  a  comparatively  long  time. 

This  astonishingly  slow  rate  of  development  is  not 
generally  understood  for  the  reason  that  opinions  on 
the  subject  are  usually  based  upon  the  ordinary  view  by 
unaided  vision.  Because  of  this  slow  development  it  is 


JThe  distinct  blue  color  of  American  iron-nutgall  ink  is  produced, 
as  we  have  seen,  by  the  addition  of  aniline  or  coal-tar  blue  which  serves 
the  temporary  purpose  of  making  the  ink  legible  when  first  put  upon 
the  paper.  The  iron-nutgall  solution  alone  is  a  pale  brown  color  and 
writing  with  it  is  almost  illegible. 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  855 

possible  in  many  instances  to  make  useful  color  com- 
parisons of  inks  that  have  been  on  the  paper  for  some 
time.  The  important  fact  is,  as  already  said,  that  the 
process  of  oxidation  is  a  continuous  one  until  the  ink  has 
reached  its  fullest  and  final  intensity  of  color.  Even 
on  the  leaves  of  a  tightly  closed  book  ink  oxidizes  contin- 
uously until  it  reaches  its  ultimate  color.  If  a  book  with 
writing  in  it  is  kept  under  great  pressure  and  not  opened, 
the  air,  with  the  moisture  it  always  carries,  may  be  suf- 
ficiently excluded  to  retard  the  oxidation  slightly,  but 
not  to  stop  it. 

In  view  of  all  these  facts  it  is  obvious  that  if  a  dis- 
puted writing,  purporting  to  have  been  written  some 
time  before,  is  a  distinct  blue  or  green  color  when  it  is 
first  shown  and  then  turns  black  in  a  short  time,  it  is  only 
necessary  to  prove  this  fact  in  order  to  show  that  the 
ink  has  not  been  on  the  paper  for  a  long  time.  To  show 
and  to  prove  this  changing  color  it  becomes  necessary, 
as  we  have  seen,  to  compare  the  ink  with  itself  at  succes- 
sive examinations,  and  to  do  this  a  record  must  be  made 
of  the  color  as  first  seen.  A  new  method  of  making  such 
a  record  is  here  described. 

The  Color  Microscope. 

A  color  record  of  an  ink  can  be  made  by  means  of  a 
new  instrument  that  may  be  described  as  a  Color  Micro- 
scope, which  was  especially  designed  for  the  comparison, 
measurement  and  recording  in  fixed  terms  of  tints  and 
shades  of  ink1.  This  special  instrument  brings  the 

aMany  occasions  arise  in  the  examination  of  questioned  documents 
when  other  uses  can  be  made  of  such  an  instrument  and  without 
some  such  assistance  as  it  gives  the  facts  in  certain  cases  cannot  be 
clearly  shown.  It  is  useful  in  all  ink  investigations,  but  is  especially 
useful  for  the  purpose  just  outlined  above. 


356  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

magnified  images  of  two  objects  or  fields  into  one  micro- 
scopic eyepiece  so  that  they  may  be  observed  side  by  side. 
This  is  accomplished  by  means  of  two  parallel  tubes 
surmounted  by  inclosed  reflecting  prisms  which  bring 
the  rays  of  light  from  the  two  objects  in  juxtaposition 
so  that  each  image  occupies  one-half  of  the  field  as  seen 
under  one  eyepiece.  By  the  use  of  matched  objectives 
the  two  fields  of  view  are  easily  and  accurately  compared 
by  being  thus  brought  close  together  under  suitable 
magnification.  Most  ink  strokes  are  so  narrow  that  they 
lack  a  sufficient  mass  of  color  to  show  tints  and  shades 
in  natural  size  by  unaided  vision,  but  under  proper 
magnification  the  most  delicate  distinctions,  both  in  tint 
and  depth  of  color,  can  readily  be  seen. 

The  Color  Microscope  was  made  to  utilize  the  Lovi- 
bond  tintometer  glasses  for  the  recording  of  ink  colors. 
By  interposing  these  delicately  graduated  red,  yellow, 
and  blue  standard  color  glasses  in  one  tube  any  color 
can  be  exactly  matched  as  seen  under  the  other  tube 
and  a  definite  record  made  of  it,  as  the  color  value  of 
each  glass  is  etched  upon  it1.  The  observation  is  made 
through  the  glass  standards  against  a  standard  white 


lrThe  first  attempts  were  made  with  coloured  liquids  in  test  tubes 
of  equal  diameters,  and  by  these  means  some  useful  information  was 
obtained.  The  liquids,  however,  soon  changed  colour,  requiring 
frequent  renewals;  and  there  was  always  a  little  uncertainty  concern- 
ing- their  exact  reproduction.  .  .  Coloured  glass  was  next  tried,  and 
long  rectangular  wedges  in  glass  of  different  colours,  with  gradually 
graded  tapers,  were  ground  and  polished  for  standards,  whilst  cor- 
respondingly tapered  vessels  were  made  for  the  liquids  to  be  measured. 
These  were  arranged  to  work,  at  the  end  of  the  instrument,  up  and 
down  at  right  angles  before  two  apertures,  side  by  side,  with  a  fixed 
centre  line  to  read  off  the  thickness  of  each  before  the-  aperture  when 
a  colour  match  was  made;  but  here  also  the  difference  of  ratio  between 
the  thickness  and  colour  depth  of  the  different  coloured  glass  and 
liquids  proved  fatal  to  the  method. — Lovibond's  Light  and  Colour, 
p.  14,  George  Gill  &  Sons,  London. 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


357 


FIG.    149 — The   Color   Microscope.      Designed   especially  for   the 
reading  and  recording  of  ink  colors. 


358  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

background,  pure  sulphate  of  lime  under  uniform  pres- 
sure being  used  for  this  purpose  as  with  the  regular 
tintometer  instrument.  In  this  manner  the  exact  con- 
stituents of  the  most  delicate  tints  can  be  determined 
and  recorded  and  comparisons  can  be  made  that  other- 
wise it  is  absolutely  impossible  to  make.  The  regular 
Lovibond  tintometer  is  an  instrument  with  which  color 
readings  are  made  without  magnification  and  cannot  be 
used  for  the  purposes  here  described.  Unless  the  color 
conditions  are  very  distinct  and  pronounced,  it  is  useless 
to  attempt  to  make  such  comparisons  without  a  suitable 
instrument. 

Exact  records  should  be  made  of  the  tint  and  shade 
of  numerous  parts  of  the  writing  on  the  first  examina- 
tion and  color  reading,  which  may  be  seen  and  verified  by 
a  number  of  observers  if  this  seems  desirable.  Definite 
descriptions,  illustrated  by  drawings,  should  also  be 
made  of  the  exact  portions  of  the  line  examined,  so  that 
at  the  second  and  all  subsequent  examinations  the  instru- 
ment can  be  replaced  and  the  glass  standards  introduced 
that  exactly  matched  the  ink  color  at  the  first  reading 
when  any  change  in  the  ink  is  at  once  apparent.  If  the 
ink  has  changed,  then  the  standard  glasses  should  be  re- 
arranged until  the  color  is  matched  again  and  a  second 
record  made  of  the  glasses  required  to  match  the  color 
of  the  ink1. 

If  at  the  first  examination  the  ink  is  apparently  very 
recent  the  second  reading  in  summer  should  be  made 
about  ten  days  later  and  the  third  a  month  later.  In 


^t  is  advisable  in  using  the  Color  Microscope  to  exclude  all  front 
and  side  light  by  the  use  of  a  small  hood  made  of  black  paper,  similar 
to  that  around  the  eyepiece  of  the  ordinary  stereoscope. 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  359 

winter  the  second  reading  may  be  made  two  or  three 
weeks  or  longer  after  the  first  reading.  If,  when  first 
examined,  the  ink  is  several  weeks  old,  the  second  read- 
ing may  be  made  two  or  three  months  later. 

The  colors  are  matched  by  a  combination  of  the  red, 
yellow  and  blue  standard  glasses  viewed  by  transmitted 
light.  The  most  delicate  differences  in  tint  or  shade  can 
be  shown1.  With  fifty  of  the  accurately  graduated 
glasses  of  each  of  the  three  colors,  the  number  of  pos- 


^t  is  difficult  to  realize  that  a  color  seen  as  Blue,  for  instance,  may 
really  be  a  combination  of  the  colors  red  and  blue,  or  yellow  and  blue, 
or  red,  yellow  and  blue,  only  one  of  which  we  see.  Few  of  the  count- 
less and  beautiful  colors  surrounding  us  are  simple,  but  are  made  up 
of  combinations  of  various  colors,  one  of  which  is  visually  predominant. 
Under  "Spectrum"  in  the  Standard  Dictionary  is  printed  an  excellent 
color  chart  showing  forty-eight  type  colors  with  an  analysis  of  each. 
A  few  of  the  more  familiar  colors,  with  the  proportions  of  constituents, 
are  as  follows: 

Black  White  Red  Orange  Yellow  Green  Blue 
Robin's-Egg    Blue..  38  41  21 

Nile    Green 25  45  30 

Gobelin    Blue 40  17  13  30 

Turquoise     34  34  32 

Sapphire    Blue 12  18  70 

Russet    40  24  20  6  10 

Olive    Green 13  18  17  8  44 

Many,  no  doubt,  will  be  surprised  to  know  that  Robin's-Egg  Blue  is 
more  green  than  blue,  and  that  the  same  is  also  true  of  Turquoise. 

It  is  well  known  that  proper  mixtures  of  the  three  colors  red, 
yellow  and  blue  in  the  form  of  pigments  or  printers'  colors  will  pro- 
duce the  three  colors  of  the  spectrum,  green,  orange  and  violet,  and 
by  changing  the  proportions  of  the  colors  first  mentioned  a  great 
variety  of  tints  and  hues  can  be  produced.  The  various  colors  of  the 
spectrum  can  also  be  produced  by  the  combination  of  the  three  colors 
red,  yellow  and  blue  as  transmitted  by  colored  glass.  A  colored  glass, 
red  for  example,  produces  its  color  by  absorption  of  the  greater  part 
of  the  other  colors,  so  that  only  red  is  visible.  It  is  a  common  error 
to  suppose  that  a  colored  glass  actually  colors  a  beam  of  light.  From 
the  fact  that  colors  by  absorption  are  not  simple,  it  becomes  possible 
by  the  mixture  of  such  lights  to  produce  a  marvelous  number  of  tints 
by  the  use  of  graduated  red,  yellow  and  blue  glasses. 

It  seems  to  be  very  well  established  that  the  three  primary  colors 
of  the  spectrum  are  not  red,  yellow  and  blue,  as  has  long  been  taught, 
but  red,  green  and  violet;  but  for  the  use  of  the  artist  who  works  in 
pigments,  or  for  the  matching  of  tints  by  colored  lights  produced  by 
absorption,  the  practical  colors  are  red,  yellow  and  blue. 


360  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

sible  combinations  is  very  great.  Each  red  standard  can 
be  combined  with  each  blue  standard,  making  twenty- 
five  hundred  combinations  of  these  two.  Each  of  these 
combinations  can  then  be  combined  with  each  of  the  fifty 
yellow  standards,  making  a  total  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty-five  thousand  combinations.  These  do  not  all 
represent  visible  distinctions,  as  many  of  the  lighter  tints 
are  extinguished  by  the  heavier  colors,  but  with  this 
number  of  graduated  standard  glasses  many  thousands 
of  actually  visible  tints  can  be  matched.  It  is  entirely 
possible  to  make  more  than  a  thousand  visible  blue  tints 
and  shades.  This  extremely  fine  gradation  of  tints 
and  shades  makes  it  possible  to  match  an  ink  color  with 
remarkable  accuracy  and  detect  the  slightest  change 
in  it1. 

With  the  means  at  hand  to  make  these  delicate  and 
accurate  color  tests  it  may  appear  that  it  ought  to  be 
possible  to  tell  by  the  color  alone  after  one  examination 
N  how  old  an  ink  is.  This  could  be  done  with  accuracy 
if  inks  were  all  made  alike  in  the  first  place,  and  then 
were  all  kept  under  the  same  conditions,  and  used  only 
when  they  had  reached  a  certain  age,  and  finally,  if  the 
writings  with  them  were  put  on  the  same  kind  and  color 
of  paper.  These  are  the  reasons  why  by  any  method 


1From  such  data  he  (Aubert)  calculated  that  in  a  solar  spectrum 
at  least  a  thousand  distinguishable  hues  are  visible.  But  we  can  still 
recognize  these  hues,  when  the  light  producing  them  is  subjected  to 
considerable  variation  in  luminosity.  Let  us  limit  ourselves  to  100 
slight  variations,  which  we  can  produce  by  gradually  increasing  the 
brightness  of  our  spectrum,  till  it  finally  is  five  times  as  luminous  as  it 
originally  was.  This  will  furnish  us  with  a  hundred  thousand  hues, 
differing  perceptibly  from  each  other.  If  each  of  these  hues  is  again 
varied  twenty  times,  by  the  addition  of  different  quantities  of  white 
light,  it  carries  the  number  of  tints  we  are  able  to  distinguish  up  as 
high  as  two  millions. — Rood's  Text  Book  of  Color,  p.  40,  D.  Appleton 
and  Company,  New  York. 


FIG.  150 — Red,  Yellow  and  Blue  pigments  and  mixtures  of  them  producing  the 
second  series  of  colors,  green,  violet,  and  orange,  and  the  combina- 
tion of  the  three  pigments  producing  black,   and   a  repre- 
sentation in  color  of  the  Lovibond  standard  glasses. 


INK  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  361 

it  is  difficult  to  say  exactly  how  old  an  ink  is  by  one 
examination1. 

In  actual  use  it  is  possible  during  the  summer  months 
to  match  with  the  color  microscope  the  changing  color 
of  an  ordinary  iron-nutgall  ink  on  white  paper  at  inter- 
vals of  about  four  hours  the  first  day ;  then  every  second 
or  third  day  the  change  in  the  tint  and  in  depth  of  color 
can  be  seen  and  recorded  for  about  one  week.  Later  a 
recognizable  change  can  be  recorded  every  second  week 
for  about  four  weeks.  Then  there  is  a  difference  that 
can  usually  be  seen  and  matched  between  two  months 
and  four  months  and  between  four  months  and  eight 
months,  and  the  difference  in  color  and  shade  between 
eight  months  and  twenty- four  months  or  more  is,  in 
most  instances,  readily  seen  and  recorded. 

The  changes  that  take  place  in  these  iron-nutgall  inks 
are  so  pronounced  that  they  are  unmistakable  and  can- 
not be  denied.  The  change  is  so  great  between  the  color, 
for  instance,  of  an  ink  after  only  a  few  days  and  after 
two  months  that  any  competent  observer  will  say  that 


iJMuch  valuable  information  and  reference  material  can  be  obtained 
by  a  systematic  series  of  color  readings  and  records  of  the  standard 
inks.  It  is  possible  to  say  that,  if  an  ink  under  examination  is  a  fresh, 
good  standard  ink,  in  one  month,  or  three  months,  or  a  year,  it  will,  on 
white  paper,  reach  about  a  given  color. 

In  the  month  of  May  iron-nutgall  ink  by  four  different  manufac- 
turers, on  bleached  white  rag  paper,  showed  the  following  color  meas- 
urements after  forty-eight  hours: 

Red  Yellow  Blue 

No.    1  1.  1.  5.2 

No.    2  1.4  .70  5.2 

No.    3  1.8  1.  5.6 

No.    4  1.  .80  5.6 

In  these  readings  only  the  heavier  parts  of  the  ink  strokes  were 
observed.  As  has  been  said  above,  it  is  usually  preferable,  for  the 
purposes  of  comparison,  to  examine  also  the  thinner  portions.  The 
difference  is  not  in  tint  but  in  depth  of  color  and  it  is  usually  easier 
to  observe  changes  in  tints  or  colors  not  too  dense. 


362  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

it  is  not  the  same  color  at  all.  If  at  the  second  reading 
the  same  glasses  are  replaced  that  matched  the  color  at 
the  previous  reading,  and  the  surrounding  conditions 
are  duplicated  and  exactly  the  same  portion  of  line  or 
spot  of  ink  is  observed  and  compared  with  the  color  in 
the  opposite  tube  that  at  the  previous  reading  was  ex- 
actly the  same  color  as  the  ink,  and  the  colors  are  dis- 
tinctly different  and  do  not  match,  then  the  only  con- 
clusion possible  is  that  the  ink  has  changed  in  color.  No 
one  can  realize  how  distinct  these  changes  actually  are 
without  making  the  observations. 

This  method  of  examination  takes  the  question  out 
of  the  field  of  opinion  testimony  and  makes  it  one  which 
is  simply  the  observation  and  interpretation  of  physical 
facts  that  are  within  the  view  and  understanding  of  any 
one  of  average  intelligence.  The  interests  of  justice  are 
always  promoted  when  means  are  provided  that  in  any 
degree  assist  in  discovering  and  showing  the  facts  in  a 
court  of  law. 


In  order  to  ascertain  the  proportions  of  the  black  inks  in  common 
use  chemical  tests  were  made  of  the  ink  on  one  hundred  business 
envelopes  containing  printed  cards  of  business  houses  with  the  follow- 
ing results:  Iron-nutgall  83;  Logwood  10;  Black  Nigrosine  6;  Blue 
Nigrosine  1. 

One  hundred  envelopes  from  individuals  containing  no  printed 
business  card,  mostly  mailed  from  small  towns,  show  by  chemical  test 
the  following  kinds  of  ink:  Logwood  45;  Iron-nutgall  30;  Black 
Nigrosine  22;  Blue  Nigrosine  3. 

Taken  together  these  tests  show  the  following  averages:  Iron- 
nutgall  56%%,  Logwood  27%%,  Black  Nigrosine  14%,  Blue  Nigrosine 
2%. 

The  number  of  writers  using  logwood  ink  is  surprisingly  large,  and, 
as  will  be  observed,  more  than  twenty  per  cent,  of  the  second  class  of 
writers  used  nigrosine. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

PAPER  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Ordinary  caution  would  seem  to  suggest  that  the  paper 
on  which  a  forged  document  is  written  should  be  care- 
fully selected,  but  experience  shows  that  in  many  cases 
no  thought  whatever  seems  to  be  given  to  the  matter.  A 
thorough  investigation  of  a  questioned  document  re- 
quires that  the  paper  be  thoroughly  examined  in  every 
particular,  and,  if  possible,  traced  to  its  source  and  posi- 
tively identified,  but  in  many  cases  only  a  superficial  and 
hasty  examination  is  made.  As  the  result  of  a  thorough 
examination  the  fraudulent  character  of  documents 
many  times  has  been  conclusively  shown  by  the  paper 
alone.  Many  forged  wills  have  been  written  on  paper 
made  years  after  the  alleged  dates  of  the  documents  and 
in  some  cases  the  paper  has  actually  contained  a  dated 
water-mark  (see  Fig.  7)  which  anyone  could  see  when 
it  wras  held  up  to  the  light. 

There  are  numerous  ways  in  which  the  matter  of  paper 
may  become  important  in  connection  with  the  study  of 
documents.  In  the  first  place,  as  stated  above,  is  the 
question  of  the  actual  age  of  the  paper  as  compared  with 
the  date  of  the  document.  The  question  also  may  arise 
as  to  whether  a  paper  is  identical  with  or  different  from 
other  paper  the  history  of  which  is  known.  It  also  some- 
times becomes  important  to  determine  if  possible  whether 
two  sheets  of  paper  of  the  same  manufacture  were  made 
at  the  same  time. 

[363] 


364  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

It  has  been  conclusively  shown  that  several  questioned 
documents  of  widely  different  dates  were  all  written  on 
paper  that  originally  formed  one  sheet,  as  was  clearly 
proved  by  the  matched  indentations  on  the  edges  of  the 
several  pieces  where  they  had  been  torn  apart.  The 
sheet  of  paper  on  which  an  anonymous  letter  has  been 
written  has  been  traced  to  a  blank  book  from  which  it 
had  been  torn,  and  which  had  been  in  the  possession  of 
the  one  who  was  accused  of  writing  the  letter;  and,  it 
is  sometimes  shown,  in  cases  of  disputed  or  anonymous 
letters,  that  a  letter  was  written  on  a  sheet  of  paper  which 
was  part  of  the  identical  pad  or  package  from  which  the 
paper  of  a  standard  or  genuine  letter  was  taken. 

Identity  or  difference  in  paper  is  shown  by  its,  (1) 
color,  (2)  thickness,  (3)  finish  or  surface,  (4)  water- 
mark, (5)  wove  or  laid  style,  (6)  cutting,  (7)  size,  (8) 
ruling,  (9)  padded  or  loose  sheets,  (10)  wire  marks,  and 
(11)  composition,  or  character  of  fibers  used  in  its 
manufacture. 

A  quick  test  of  identity  of  papers  that  externally  seem 
to  be  identical  can  be  made  by  micrometer  calipers.  As 
described  in  the  chapter  on  instruments  and  appliances, 
the  best  instruments  for  this  purpose  are  actuated  by  a 
spring  rachet,  which  automatically  governs  the  pressure 
exerted,  and  the  instrument  should  also  carry  a  vernier 
to  read  in  ten-thousandths  of  an  inch.  Actual  measure- 
ments of  papers  in  fractions  of  an  inch  show  wide  varia- 
tion in  thickness  as  indicated  by  the  following  results: 
thin  Japanese  tissue,  calendared  .0009;  ordinary  tissue 
.0014;  light  typewriting  .0027;  heavy  wedding  note 
.0071;  average  visiting  card  .0182;  forty-ply  card  .0763. 
By  these  accurate  measurements  ordinary  writing  paper 


PAPER  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  365 

can  by  the  thickness  test  alone,  as  shown  in  the  chapter 
on  instruments,  be  put  into  about  sixty  classes  when 
measured  in  thousandths  of  an  inch. 

When  measured  so  accurately  as  in  ten-thousandths  of 
an  inch  there  is  some  variation  in  the  thickness  of  sheets 
in  the  same  package,  but  with  good  paper,  when  several 
measurements  are  averaged,  the  variation  is  very  slight. 
It  is  possible  to  mix  up  sheets  of  paper  of  very  similar 
character  but  actually  of  different  make  and  to  sort  them 
by  the  thickness  test  alone.  Thin  papers  tested  show  an 
occasional  variation  of  one  ten-thousandth  of  an  inch  in 
a  maximum  thickness  of  twenty-three  ten-thousandths, 
and  thick  paper  shows  an  occasional  variation  of  five 
ten-thousandths  of  an  inch  out  of  a  maximum  thickness 
of  seventy-two  ten-thousandths. 

When  questioned  documents  are  written  on  printed 
forms  it  is  very  important  to  find  when  and  where  the 
forms  were  made.  It  has  been  shown  that  the  printed 
blank  forms  on  which  disputed  checks,  notes,  drafts  and 
marriage  certificates  where  written  were  printed  long 
after  the  alleged  dates  of  the  documents.  Investiga- 
tion should  not  be  stopped  because  it  seems  to  promise 
no  results;  astonishing  information  has  been  secured  in 
some  instances  after  most  discouraging  initial  efforts. 
In  one  important  case  it  was  positively  shown  that  a 
diary  containing  a  record  of  an  alleged  marriage  was 
bought  four  years  after  the  date  of  the  diary  and  the 
entry. 

If  documents  purporting  to  be  old  contain  a  blank 
date  line  with  the  year  partly  printed,  this  portion  of 
the  form  should  be  scrutinized  with  especial  care  to  see 
if  erasures  or  changes  have  been  made  to  make  it  con- 


366 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


form  to  the  century  or  division  of  the  century  desired. 
It  is  difficult,  for  example,  in  1910  to  find  a  blank  form 
of  the  year  1890,  and  it  may  be  necessary  for  the  forger 
to  make  it  partly  by  hand  or  to  have  it  specially  printed. 

The  question  of  the  matching  of  paper  and  envelopes 
is  sometimes  of  importance,  especially  the  indentations 
on  inclosures  made  by  post-office  dating  stamps.  It  has 
been  shown  in  this  way  that  an  alleged  letter  was  not 
mailed  in  an  envelope  which  it  is  claimed  contained  it. 

Checks,  drafts  or  other  commercial  paper  torn  from 
a  stub  at  a  perforated  line  can  in  some  cases  be  matched 


FIG.  151 — Check  Stub  and  part  of  Forged  Check,  showing,  by  the  matching  of  torn 

perforated  line,  the  unmistakable  connection  between   the    Forged   Check 

and  this  Stub  Book.     The  Stub  Book  was  found  on  person  of  accused. 


PAPER  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  367 

with  the  stub  by  the  inequalities  and  variations  in  the 
torn  parts,  thus  showing  where  the  particular  form  came 
from.  Such  a  task  may  seem  hopeless  at  the  outset, 
but  it  is  astonishing  how  convincingly  such  apparently 
obscure  facts  can  sometimes  be  shown. 

The  exact  condition  of  the  paper  of  a  document  as 
to  cleanliness,  folds,  creases,  etc.,  is  also  at  times  a 
matter  of  vital  importance  and  should  receive  careful 
attention.  Blots  or  offsets  may  show  the  original  rela- 
tion of  two  sheets  of  paper  or  envelopes  and  blots  or 
offsets  on  the  back  of  a  genuine  or  standard  letter  may 
match  the  writing  of  the  address  of  a  disputed  letter 
showing  the  contact  of  letters  before  the  ink  was  dry 
and  pointing  to  their  common  origin.  Soiled  places 
due  to  accident  or  design  should  be  carefully  studied 
and  if  possible  interpreted.  Finger  prints  if  discern- 
ible in  the  slightest  degree  should  be  carefully  examined 
and  photographed.  Marks  or  words  may  be  made  by 
accident  or  design  on  the  side  or  edge  of  a  pad  or  block 
of  paper  and  by  this  means  sheets  of  paper  from  this 
source  can  sometimes  be  identified. 

The  exact  tint  and  shade  of  the  paper  in  question 
should  be  ascertained  in  good  daylight  by  the  color 
microscope  and  its  exact  thickness  measured  by  micro- 
meter calipers,  as  described  above.  The  exact  size  of 
the  original  sheet  and  whether  it  was  cut  by  hand  on 
one  or  more  edges1  should  be  ascertained;  also  whether 
it  is  note,  letter,  legal  or  foolscap  and  whether  it  was 
glued  at  top  or  side  of  the  sheet  in  pad  form.  If  the 


JThe  next  question  whether  the  edges  of  the  note  were  cut,  or  the 
ordinary  foolscap  edge,  was  competent  for  the  same  reason. — Dubois 
vs.  Baker,  30  N.  Y.,  365  (1864). 


368 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


paper  was  torn  from  a  larger  sheet  the  indentations 
should  be  carefully  examined.  The  exact  width,  uni- 
formity, location,  and  kind  and  color  of  ink  of  the  rul- 
ing of  the  sheet  should  be  observed  and  also  the  parallel- 
ism of  the  ruling  with  the  upper  and  lower  edges  of  the 


FIG.  152 — Two  examples  of  matching  of  torn  edges  of  paper.    The  upper  illus- 
tration  shows  the  matched  torn  perforations  of  postage  stamps. 
The  lower  illustration  is  of  the  torn  edges  of  two  dis- 
puted receipts  of  widely  differing  dates. 

sheet.  Any  imperfections  of  any  kind  should  be  care- 
fully noted  and  investigated.  Some  paper  is  not  finished 
alike  on  both  sides,  and  this  is  another  matter  that  should 
receive  attention. 

At  the  first  examination  the  whole  surface  of  both 
sides  of  the  paper  ought  to  be  carefully  examined  in 
good  daylight  with  the  sheet  held  at  various  angles  al- 
lowing the  light  to  strike  the  surface  obliquely.  If  this 
is  properly  done  any  evidences  of  chemical  or  mechanical 


PAPER  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  369 

erasures,  or  disturbance  of  the  paper  fiber,  or  of  dulling 
of  the  finish  of  the  sheet  by  any  means  can  usually  be 
clearly  seen.  All  folds  and  creases  on  both  sides  of  the 
sheet  should  be  carefully  examined  under  proper  magni- 
fication to  see  if  the  writing  was  done  before  or  after 
the  folding. 

The  discovery  of  the  actual  date  of  the  making  of  a 
particular  sheet  of  paper  is  not,  of  course,  always  pos- 
sible but  the  fact  that  such  paper  must  have  been  made 
before  or  after  a  certain  definite  date  can  sometimes  be 
shown  and  this  information  alone  may  be  sufficient  to 
prove  that  a  document  could  not  have  been  made  at  the 
time  it  is  claimed  that  it  was  made. 

In  some  cases 
paper  contains  a 
dated  water- 
mark showing 
the  year  it  was 
made  and  then 
again  it  can  be 

proved    that    a          FIG.  153 — Illustration  of  an  accident  to  a  water- 
mark. 

certain  water- 
mark which  contains  no  date  was  not  used  before  a 
certain  definite  time.  Paper  on  which  important  docu- 
ments are  written  can  frequently  be  traced  to  the  mill 
where  it  was  made  and  there  the  sheets  can  often  be 
positively  identified  as  of  a  certain  particular  run.  Ac- 
cidents, changes,  repairs,  new  methods  and  different 
materials  used,  all  affect  the  result  and  may  indicate 
clearly  when  the  paper  was  made.  A  careful  study 
should  be  made  of  every  part  of  the  water-mark  as  well 
as  of  the  wire  gauze  marking  of  the  paper. 


370  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

In  the  process  of  paper  making  the  paper  fiber  is 
floated  out  on  a  moving  gauze  sheet  through  which  a 
large  part  of  the  water  runs  at  once,  leaving  the  loose 
fiber  which  is  carried  under  a  revolving  cylinder,  also 
covered  with  wire  gauze,  and  this  packs  the  fiber  together 
and  squeezes  out  most  of  the  water  that  has  not  already 
drained  through  the  lower  gauze.  This  gauze  covered 
cylinder,  called  the  dandy-roll,  carries  the  water-mark 
which  is  formed  of  flexible  wire  soldered  to  the  surface 
of  this  roll,  forming  a  design  with  letters  or  figures. 
The  pressure  of  these  raised  wires  on  the  soft  wet  fiber 
presses  aside  a  portion  of  it,  making  the  paper  more 
transparent  and  thus  printing  into  the  sheet  the  mark. 

When  the  dandy-roll  carries  equidistant  raised  wires 
around  the  roll  these  mark  the  sheet  lengthwise  with 
parallel  marks,  in  the  same  manner  as  the  water-mark  is 
made.  Paper  with  these  parallel  water-marked  lines  is 
called  "laid"  and  paper  without  such  marks  is  called 
"wove."  The  "laid"  paper  has  also  a  series  of  finer 
transparent  lines  running  at  right  angles  to  the  con- 
spicuous water-marked  lines. 

Many  things  may  occur  that  will  indicate  the  date  of 
the  paper.  One  of  the  most  common  is  regular  changes 
in  the  water-mark  in  design,  size,  position,  or  arrange- 
ment of  parts.  These  changes,  the  dates  of  which  can 
usually  be  ascertained,  indicate  before  or  after  what  date 
the  paper  was  made.  When  the  water-mark  contains  an 
actual  year  date  this  is,  of  course,  conclusive.  As  has 
been  said  the  water-mark  design  is  soldered  on  the  dandy- 
roll  and  repairs  are  sometimes  necessary  as  part  of  the 
design  or  letters  may  become  loose,  bent  or  broken.  Such 
an  accident  may  have  marked  in  a  peculiar  manner  a 


PAPER  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


371 


part  of  a  certain  definite  run  of  paper,  and,  as  samples 
are  usually  kept  for  future  reference,  such  imperfect 
paper  may  be  definitely  identified  and  the  date  fixed. 
The  dandy-roll  or  the  gauze  apron  may  be  renewed  or 
changed,  which  would  also  affect  the  result.  As  the 
water-marks  are  soldered  on  the  dandy-roll  by  hand,  no 


FIG.  154 — Dated  water-marks  in  ordinary  Government  stamped  envelopes  of 
years  '99,  1903  and  1907.     A  transmitted  light  photograph. 

two  of  a  series  are  likely  to  be  exactly  identical.  In  case 
of  a  change  in  diameter  of  the  dandy-roll  the  water- 
marks in  the  sheet  would  be  just  so  much  nearer  together 
or  farther  apart,  and  would  thus  identify  and  date  every 
sheet  of  paper  made  in  which  two  water-marks  or  parts 
of  two  water-marks  appear. 

Accidents  may  occur  by  which  the  wire  cloth  under 
the  paper  or  the  wire  covering  on  the  dandy-roll  may  be 
injured  so  as  to  mark  every  run  of  paper  thereafter. 
The  dandy-rolls  for  the  different  styles  of  paper,  al- 
though carefully  handled,  are  sometimes  buckled  or 
twisted,  causing  streaks  to  appear  in  the  paper  in  exact 
relation  to  certain  water-marks  and  this  may  mark  the 
date  of  paper  showing  this  characteristic.  The  date 
significance  of  some  of  these  accidents  may  not  be  ap- 


372 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


parent  to  the  mill  foreman  or  manager  until  his  atten- 
tion is  particularly  called  to  them,  and  investigations 
should  not  be  given  up  because  discouragement  is  met 
with  at  the  outset.  It  may  be  possible  to  discover  con- 
clusive evidence  bearing  on  a  case  involving  the  distribu- 
tion of  an  estate  worth  hundreds  of  times  more  than 
the  value  of  the  mill. 

It  is  said  that  imita- 
tion water-marks  or  de- 
signs have  been  made  with 
oil  or  grease  or  produced 
by  pressure  with  a  die 
after  the  paper  is  made. 
In  these  cases  it  would 
appear  that  there  is  as 
much  fiber  where  the 
mark  appears  as  else- 
where but  the  paper  has 
been  made  more  trans- 
parent either  by  the  pres- 
sure or  by  the  grease  or 
oil.  It  is  recommended 
in  such  a  case  that  the 
wetting  the  sheet  with  a 
caustic  solution  or  even  with  water  will  dim  or  obliterate 
such  a  design  but  will  make  a  true  water-mark  more 
distinct1. 

Questions  of  this  nature  are  not  likely  to  arise  regard- 
ing forged  commercial  papers  of  any  kind,  but  must 
sometimes  be  considered  in  connection  with  the  investiga- 


FIG.  155— The  earliest  example  of 
an  English  water-mark,  1363,  as 
given  by  Scott  &  Davey  in  "His- 
torical Documents,  etc." 


^Historical  Documents,  Literary  Manuscripts  and  Autograph  Letters, 
by  Rev.  Dr.  Scott  and  Samuel  Davey,  London,  1891. 


PAPER  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  373 

tion  of  alleged  writing  of  celebrated  persons  and  the 
examination  of  forged  manuscripts  of  various  kinds. 
In  the  celebrated  Ireland-  Shakespeare  forgeries,  en- 
titled "Miscellaneous  Papers  and  Legal  Instruments," 
published  in  London  in  a  beautiful  folio  edition  in  1795, 
the  fabricator  was  unable  to  find  suitable  water-marked 
paper  for  an  extended  writing1. 

The  identity  of  paper  may  be  determined  by  a  micro- 
scopic examination  of  the  materials  of  which  it  is  com- 
posed, the  different  fibers  having  distinct  peculiarities 


the  manuscript  of  his  presumptuous  new  version  of  "Kynge 
Leare,"  Ireland,  the  literary  forger,  put  paper  with  "twenty  different 
water-marks."  Edmond  Malone,  in  his  scholarly  book  exposing  the 
fraud,  "An  Inquiry  into  the  Authenticity  of  Certain  Papers  and  Instru- 
ments Attributed  to  Shakespeare,  etc.,"  published  in  1796,  says  on  this 
point: 

"The  true  and  natural  paper-warehouse  for  such  a  schemer  to 
repair  to  is,  the  shop  of  a  bookseller,  where  every  folio  and  quarto  of 
the  age  of  Elizabeth  and  James  would  supply  a  couple  of  single  leaves 
of  white-brown  paper,  of  the  hue  required."  .  .  .  What  would  an 
author  naturally  do  when  he  sat  down  to  write  a  play,  at  least  such 
an  author  as  Shakespeare,  who  at  the  time  LEAR  was  produced  was 
in  the  zenith  of  his  reputation,  and  in  affluent  circumstances?  Would 
he  not  purchase  a  paper-book,  or  at  least  a  quire  of  paper,  which 
would  be  sufficient  for  the  longest  piece  he  ever  wrote,  and  could  then 
be  procured  for  five  pence?  But  what  would  he  do  who  sat  down  to 
write  a  play  for  him  near  two  centuries  after  his  death?  He  would 
pick  up  as  well  as  he  could  such  scraps  of  old  paper  as  he  could  find, 
at  various  times,  and  in  various  places;  he  would,  as  in  the  present 
case,  not  be  able  to  show  any  of  his  pretended  originals  except  in  the 
form  of  half  or  quarter  sheets,  and  these  single  leaves  having  been 
collected  from  various  quarters  would  exhibit  more  than  twenty  dif- 
ferent paper-marks." 

"As  I  trust,  that  the  now  unknown  contriver  of  the  present  im- 
posture will  hereafter  be  discovered,  and  hope  that  he  will  have  a 
due  sense  of  the  heinousness  of  his  offense  against  society  and  the 
cause  of  letters,  the  following  formulary  of  recantation  and  contrition, 
written  for  Lauder  by  Dr.  Johnson,  may  very  properly  (mutatis  mutan- 
dis) be  recommended  to  him:"  (pp.  311,  313,  355). 

Strange  to  say  nine  years  afterwards,  in  1805,  Ireland,  the  forger, 
apparently  following  Malone's  advice,  wrote  his  confessions  which  were 
published  in  book  form,  and  on  the  question  of  paper,  of  interest  in 
connection  with  Malone's  surmise  and  our  present  discussion,  said: 

"I  applied  to  a  bookseller  named  Verey,  in  Great  May's  Buildings, 
St.  Martin's  Lane,  who,  for  the  sum  of.  five  shillings,  suffered  me  to 
take  from  the  folio  and  quarto  volumes  in  his  shop  the  fly-leaves 
which  they  contained."  (p.  71.) 


374  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

that  can  be  positively  identified.  In  questioned  docu- 
ments that  purport  to  have  been  written  many  years  be- 
fore it  may  be  possible  to  show  that  the  paper  actually 
contains  wood  fiber,  a  constituent  not  in  use  before  a 
definite  date.  The  first  foundation  patent  in  the  sulphite 
process  for  preparing  wood  pulp  was  granted  in  1867. 
The  fibers  most  commonly  used  in  paper  making  are 
linen,  cotton,  straw,  jute,  hemp,  manila,  also  bleached 
and  unbleached  sulphite  preparation  of  spruce  and  pop- 
lar pulp,  soda  poplar  pulp  and  ground  or  mechanical 
spruce  and  poplar  pulp.  These  various  fibers  are  identi- 
fied by  their  shape  and  length,  by  their  joints,  thicken- 
ings, and  markings  of  the  cell  walls,  and  by  the  presence 
of  characteristic  cells.  These  fibers  are  also  identified 
by  color  characteristics  upon  being  brought  in  contact 
with  certain  staining  agents  which  show  different  re- 
sults with  different  fibers.  There  are  many  tests  for 
ground  or  mechanical  wood  which  taken  together  are 
considered  conclusive  by  those  best  qualified  to  speak  on 
the  subject.1. 


1A  valuable  article  on  the  subject  of  paper  composition  by  W.  R. 
Whitney  and  A.  G.  Woodman  of  the  Massachusetts  Institute  of  Tech- 
nology was  published  in  the  Technology  Quarterly,  Vol.  XV.  No.  3, 
Sept.  1902.  This  paper  is  elaborately  illustrated  and  contains  much 
important  information  on  the  subject  of  paper  materials.  All  phases 
of  paper  making  are  discussed  in  the  valuable  "Text-Book  of  Paper 
Making,"  by  C.  T.  Cross  and  E.  J.  Bevan,  Third  Edition,  London.  Two 
other  important  books  on  the  subject  are,  "The  Chemistry  of  Paper 
Making,"  by  Griffin  &  Little,  and  a  new  work,  "The  Manufacture  of 
Paper,"  by  R.  W.  Sindall. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

SEQUENCE   OF    WRITING   AS    SHOWN    BY    CROSSED    STROKES 

To  show  which  of  two  pen  strokes  that  cross  each  other 
was  last  made  is  sometimes  a  matter  of  great  importance 
in  the  investigation  of  a  questioned  document.  To  one 
unfamiliar  with  the  subject  it  may  seem  impossible  that 
such  a  problem  would  ever  furnish  adequate  physical 
evidence  on  which  to  base  a  positive  conclusion,  but  a 
few  simple  experiments  will  show  that  under  many  con- 
ditions the  sequence  or  order  of  crossed  strokes  can  be 
shown  with  absolute  certainty. 

As  with  nearly  all  the  special  questions  discussed  on 
preceding  pages  it  seems  necessary  to  say  plainly  that 
while  it  is  true  that  the  problem  treated  in  this  chapter 
can  sometimes  be  definitely  solved,  it  is  also  important 
to  remember  that  under  some  circumstances  it  is  im- 
possible for  any  one  to  tell  which  of  two  crossed  lines 
was  last  made,  and  in  every  such  inquiry  the  evidence 
upon  which  a  positive  opinion  is  based  should  be  clear 
enough  so  that  with  proper  assistance  and  instruments 
even  an  unskilled  observer  can  see  for  himself.  A  few 
easy  tests  will  expose  the  assumption  of  one  who  claims 
to  be  able  to  determine  under  any  and  all  conditions 
which  of  two  lines  was  last  made.  When  one  claims  to 
see  in  a  disputed  document  what,  with  the  best  assistance, 
judge,  jury,  or  opposing  counsel  cannot  see,  it  is  safest 
to  assume  that  that  thing  does  not  exist. 

The  necessity  for  an  investigation  of  this  question  of 

[3T5] 


376  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

line  crossings  arises  when  it  is  alleged  that  an  interlinea- 
tion or  qualifying  statement  is  written  in  after  a  signa- 
ture was  attached^  to  a  document  and  the  two  writings 
touch  at  some  point,  or  it  is  desired  for  any  reason  to 
learn  which  of  two  writings  that  touch  was  last  written. 
There  are  many  occasions  when  to  prove  which  stroke 


&&: 


FIG.  156 — Exhibit  in  case  of  Kerr  vs.  Southwick.    It  was  decided  in  the  U.  S. 

Circuit  Court,  New  York,  that  the  interlineation  followed 

the  writing  of  the  signature. 

is  uppermost  is  to  decide  a  case.  It  may  be  very  im- 
portant simply  to  show  the  order  in  which  signatures 
were  attached  to  a  document.  Another  related  question 
that  sometimes  arises  in  this  connection  is  as  to  the  length 
of  time  intervening  between  two  writings  that  touch 
when  there  may  be  no  dispute  as  to  which  was  written 
last. 

If  a  distinct  second  ink  line  made  with  ordinary  fluid 
ink  crosses  a  first  after  the  first  has  been  absorbed  into 
the  paper  but  is  still  slightly  damp,  the  ink  at  the  cross- 
ing will  run  out  on  the  first  line  in  a  pronounced  and 
unmistakable  manner.  Many  examples  of  crossings  of 
this  kind  can  be  seen  in  pages  of  writing  where  the  long 
letters  of  the  different  lines  touch  each  other.  It  re- 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES 


377 


quires  some  minutes  for  a  line  to  become  absolutely  dry, 
and  under  very  humid  conditions  this  pronounced  run- 
ning of  the  ink  will  continue  for  a  considerable  time. 

The  running  or  spreading  of  the  ink  into  a  preceding 
line  or  stroke  is  not  merely  the  running  of  the  ink  from 
stroke  to  stroke  but  from  the  pen  itself  charged  with  ink 
when  it  touches  the  previous  line.  A  light  unshaded 
stroke  contains  but  little  ink  and  it  would  appear  that 
there  is  not  enough  ink  to  run  over  upon  a  previous  line, 
but  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  line  must  have  been 
made  with  a  pen  carrying  more  ink  than  was  necessary 
to  make  the  line  up  to  that  point. 

It  is  important  to  know  that  this  same  spreading  of 
the  ink  of  the  second  line  out  on  the  first  also  continues, 


FIG.  157— An  illustration  made  to  show  how  clearly  a  delicate  and  obscure 

fact  can  be  shown  by  an  enlarged  photograph.    The  enlargement  (x  32) 

shows  that  "  full "  must  have  been  written  after  the  signature. 


378  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

but  in  a  less  pronounced  manner,  after  the  first  line  is 
entirely  dry,  the  extent  of  the  spreading  depending  upon 
various  conditions  but  especially  upon  the  time  interven- 
ing between  the  two  writings. 

The  main  cause  of  the  widening  of  the  last  stroke  at 
the  crossing  seems  to  be  that  the  paper  and  ink  where 
the  first  line  was  made,  even  when  the  ink  is  entirely 
dry,  have  greater  attraction  for  the  fresh  ink  than  the 
paper  where  no  ink  has  been  applied.  An  ink  line  made 
across  a  place  on  ordinary  calendered  paper,  like  ordi- 
nary foolscap,  where  simply  a  drop  of  water  has  been 
applied  and  allowed  to  dry  on  the  paper  will  be  wider,  as 
compared  with  the  same  line  made  over  other  portions 
of  the  same  sheet.  Another  cause  of  the  spreading  of 
the  second  stroke  when  two  lines  cross  is  the  abrasion 
of  the  paper  under  the  first  line  by  the  nibs  of  the  pen 
which  makes  the  paper  more  porous.  The  ink  of  a 
crossing  stroke  will  often  run  out  in  the  furrows  of 
the  pen  nibs  when  it  does  not  run  out  on  the  main  part 
of  the  line.  The  ink  of  a  second  line  will  also  sometimes 
run  out  into  the  abraded  tracks  of  the  nibs  of  the  pen 
in  the  first  stroke  even  after  the  first  ink  has  become 
completely  oxidized  and  set  and  when  the  ink  itself  does 
not  attract  the  fresh  ink  of  the  second  stroke. 

It  is  of  course  understood  that  the  swelling  of  the 
line  at  the  crossing  is  a  microscopic  fact,  but  it  is  none 
the  less  a  fact  on  that  account,  and  can  be  easily  seen 
with  the  microscope  by  an  ordinary  observer  and  readily 
measured  with  the  filar  micrometer;  without  the  micro- 
scope the  fact  may  be  denied.  The  widening  of  the  last 
stroke  can  sometimes  be  seen  by  transmitted  light  even 
with  a  hand  magnifier  under  low  magnification,  but  it 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES 


379 


FIG.  158— Parts  of  two  signa- 
tures in  a  legal  controversy. 
One  party  claimed  the  lower 
signature  was  written  first. 
The  enlarged  transmitted  light 
photograph  shows  that  the  sig- 
natures were  written  in  natural 
order. 


FIG.  159— Vertical  stroke  crossed  by 
upper  horizontal  after  five  min- 
utes and  by  lower  stroke 
after  a  few  hours. 


380  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

is  most  effectively  shown  by  an  enlarged  transmitted 
light  photo-micrograph  of  the  crossing. 

The  physical  result  of  the  crossing  of  two  ink  lines 
is  greatly  changed  if  the  last  or  upper  line,  made  not  too 
long  after  the  first,  is  shaded  and  a  blotter  is  applied  at 
once.  If  the  second  line  is  made  before  the  ink  of  the 
first  line  has  oxidized  and  become  fixed  the  fresh  ink 
unites  to  some  extent  with  the  ink  of  the  first  line  at 
the  point  of  crossing,  and  the  blotter  takes  up  much  of 
the  ink  of  the  line  last  made  and  also  some  of  the  ink  of 
the  first  line  at  the  crossing.  The  result  of  this  blotting 
of  the  second  line  is  that  the  first  or  under  line  is  dimmed 
or  lightened  at  the  crossing  and  is  not  of  uniform,  con- 
tinuous color,  and  the  upper  or  last  line  is  more  uniform 
and  shows  continuous  uniform  margins. 

If  the  first  stroke  was  also  shaded  and  then  blotted  at 
once  and  the  second  stroke  also  immediately  blotted  it 
may  not  be  possible  to  determine  which  was  last  made 
unless,  on  two  lines  of  equal  width  and  made  with  the 
same  pen,  the  continuous  tracks  of  the  pen  nibs  of  the 
upper  or  last  line  show  at  the  crossing  more  distinctly 
than  the  nib  marks  of  the  first  stroke.  If  the  first  line 
was  blotted  and  the  second  line  made  soon  after  was  not, 
then  the  distinct  and  conspicuous  widening  of  the  last 
line  at  the  crossing  usually  shows  without  any  doubt 
which  was  last  written. 

The  result  produced  by  the  application  of  the  blotter 
is  different  if  the  second  line  is  made  a  long  time  after 
the  first  line  is  written,  unless  the  first  line  was  written 
with  ordinary  nigrosine  ink,  in  which  case  the  lapse  of 
time  does  not  greatly  change  the  result.  If  the  ink  in 
the  first  line  is  ordinary  writing  fluid  of  the  iron-nut  gall 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES 


381 


FIG.  160— The  order  of  writing  of  three  lines  shown  clearly 

by  enlarged  photograph.    Line  No.  2  was  blotted 

at  once  and  No.  f  was  made  before 

No.  2  was  entirely  dry. 


382  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

class  and,  as  stated  above,  has  become  completely  oxi- 
dized, a  blotting  of  the  second  line  will  not  dim  the  first 
and  it  may  be  difficult  to  determine  which  was  last  made, 
and  at  first  sight  the  darker,  unblotted  first  line  may 
appear  to  be  over  the  other  and  lighter  line  last  made. 

Writing  with  the  ordinary  commercial  iron  inks  when 
fresh  can  be  nearly  all  washed  off  the  paper  by  simply 
applying  water.  This  is  the  reason  why  such  ink  lines 
even  when  dry  if  not  too  old  are  partly  taken  up  by  a 
blotter  if  crossed  by  a  heavy  line  that  is  blotted  at  once. 
A  peculiarity  of  logwood  ink  is  that  it  is  not  thus  affected 
by  water,  so  that  the  ink  in  a  first  stroke,  if  dry,  is  not 
thus  taken  up  to  the  same  extent  by  the  process  of 
blotting. 

In  the  natural  course  of  events  fraudulent  additions 
to  documents  are  usually  made  soon  after  the  document 
is  first  written  and  sometimes  immediately  after  and 
with  the  same  writing  materials,  and  thus  the  sequence 
of  crossed  lines  can  usually  be  shown  whether  blotted  or 
not.  The  indented  tracks  of  the  nibs  of  the  pen  in  very 
old  writing  are  apt  to  become  indistinct  and  may  almost 
entirely  disappear,  in  which  case  a  shaded  stroke  across 
such  old  writing  showing  distinct  pen  furrows  would 
indicate  a  later  writing. 

As  described  in  the  chapter  on  ink,  the  extreme  edges 
of  lines  made  with  certain  classes  of  ink  show  micro- 
scopic continuous  dark  borders  several  shades  darker 
than  the  main  part  of  the  stroke.  These  borders  are 
outside  of  the  tracks  of  the  pen  nibs  and  on  the  extreme 
edges  of  the  strokes  and  are  apparently  due  to  a  doub- 
ling of  the  ink  film  or  a  gathering  of  the  suspended 
coloring  matter  at  the  rounded  edges  of  the  wet  line 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES  383 

when  it  dries  on  the  paper.  This  peculiar  margin  is  a 
pronounced  characteristic  of  inks  which  are  not  true 
fluids  but  carry  coloring  matter  in  suspension. 

Nigrosine  ink  and  some  colored  aniline  inks  show 
such  line  margins  very  plainly  and  this  effect  is  ac- 
centuated if  the  writing  was  blotted  with  the  ordinary 
blotter.  When  the  same  ink  is  used  for  both  writings 
these  dark  margins  alone  are  sufficient  in  many  instances 
to  show  which  of  the  two  crossed  lines  was  last  made 
if  one  carefully  observes  on  which  line  the  margins  are 
continuous,  as  is  clearly  shown  in  Fig.  29.  In  some 
cases  these  margins  and  the  nib  marks  are  both  con- 
tinuous on  one  of  the  lines  at  the  crossing,  showing  con- 
clusively that  this  was  the  last  line  made. 

Ink  of  the  nigrosine  class,  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
is  simply  a  coloring  agent  dissolved  in  water,  does  not 
run  out  on  a  crossed  line  to  such  an  extent  as  fluid  ink, 
although  a  fluid  ink  line  will  usually  widen  on  a  nigro- 
sine line  first  made.  When  a  nigrosine  ink  line  is  crossed 
by  an  ink  line  of  the  same  class  the  last  or  wet  line  has 
a  tendency  to  dissolve  the  first  at  the  point  of  crossing, 
no  matter  how  old  the  first  may  be,  and  the  margins  of 
the  last  line  plainly  extend  across  the  first,  although  the 
last  line  with  this  ink  may  not  widen  at  the  crossing. 

If  a  wet  or  unabsorbed  ink  line  is  crossed  by  another 
line  in  the  same  condition  the  result  does  not  usually 
show  which  was  last  made.  If  a  heavy  and  still  wet 
shaded  line  is  crossed  by  a  similar  line  on  very  hard 
paper  the  nib  marks  of  the  last  line  at  the  crossing  as 
observed  by  transmitted  light  will  be  much  more  pro- 
nounced than  on  the  first  line  because  the  wet  line  first 
made  has  softened  the  paper  at  that  point.  If  a  blotter 


384  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

is  applied  before  the  ink  is  dry,  this  increased  density 
of  the  nib  marks  of  the  second  line  will  often  be  shown 
quite  plainly.  When  the  second  line  is  not  at  right 
angles  to  the  first  but  crosses  in  a  direction  only  a  few 
degrees  removed  from  the  first  the  manner  in  which  the 
ink  runs  across  from  one  line  to  the  other  may  show 
which  was  last  made. 

For  examination  of  crossed  lines  a  good  hand  magni- 
fier or  a  compound  microscope  must  be  used,  and  ex- 
amination should  be  made  in  good  daylight  after  ex- 
periments with  light  on  the  document  from  various 
directions  until  just  the  proper  angle  is  found  that 
shows  most  clearly  the  existing  facts.  A  certain  partic- 
ular angle  of  view  will  usually  show  conditions  which 
otherwise  may  not  be  clearly  seen.  It  is  also  advisable 
to  remove  the  microscope  tube  and  observe  the  crossing 
under  magnification  with  the  tube  inclined  at  various 
degrees  from  horizontal  up  to  vertical1.  The  two  crossed 
lines  should  each  be  looked  at  lengthwise  with  the  sur- 
face of  the  paper  held  nearly  on  a  line  with  the  eye  and 
turned  gradually  around  until  each  line  has  been  looked 
at  lengthwise  in  both  directions.  Such  examination  may 
show  which  line  is  continuous  at  the  crossing. 

None  of  these  phenomena  as  a  rule  are  plainly 
observable  in  fresh  writing,  and  specimens  for  compari- 
son, study,  or  tests,  should  be  old  enough  so  that  fluid 
ink  has  reached  its  fullest  intensity  of  color,  if  this  is  the 
condition  of  the  writing  in  question.  If  the  inquiry  is 


certain  conditions  examination  by  "oblique  vision,"  as 
described  by  Frazer  in  "Bibliotics  or  The  Study  of  Documents,"  will 
show  the  sequence  of  crossed  lines,  but  the  method  must  be  used  with 
great  caution  or  incorrect  conclusions  may  be  reached. 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES  385 

regarding  a  nigrosine  ink  specimens  can  be  made  and  the 
phenomena  observed  as  soon  as  the  ink  is  dry. 

As  already  stated,  under  certain  conditions  it  is  not 
possible  to  tell  which  of  two  crossed  lines  was  last  made. 
The  conditions  affecting  the  question  are,  the  kind  of 
pen  used,  the  movement  employed,  the  speed  of  the 
strokes  in  question,  the  kind  or  kinds  of  ink  used  and 
its  condition,  the  character  of  the  paper,  the  probable 
time  between  the  writing  of  the  parts  in  question,  the 
number  of  crossed  lines  for  examination,  the  use  of 
blotter  on  one  or  both  writings,  the  delicacy  or  lightness 
of  the  lines  which  cross,  and  the  porosity  or  dryness  of 
the  paper. 

Strokes  made  rapidly  on  rough  paper  with  a  fine  pen 
crossed  by  similar  strokes  may  not  show  which  was  last 
made,  but  fortunately  fraudulent  additions  to  a  docu- 
ment are  usually  made  deliberately  and  distinctly;  often 
such  writing  is  actually  heavier  than  the  regular  writing, 
and  the  sequence  of  the  crossing  is  always  more  clearly 
shown  if  a  light  stroke  is  crossed  by  a  heavier  and  slower 
one  than  if  this  process  is  reversed. 

If  two  inks  of  entirely  different  composition  are  used 
and  the  second  writing  does  not  follow  soon  after  the 
first  the  second  line  may  not  widen  at  the  crossing;  but 
under  such  circumstances  other  things  will  be  apt  to 
show  a  different  time  of  writing.  Thick  and  heavy  inks 
may  not  widen  at  a  crossing,  and  inks  may  be  so  thin, 
pale  and  indistinct  that  the  order  of  the  crossing  cannot 
be  determined.  One  part  of  such  an  examination  under 
some  circumstances  should  be  a  chemical  test  of  the  ink 
of  the  two  writings,  and  if  the  inks  are  different  this 
will  naturally  show  a  different  time  of  writing. 


386  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

Special  caution  is  necessary  in  determining  the 
sequence  of  lines  of  different  width  or  different  inten- 
sity of  color.  A  heavy  line  at  first  sight  always  seems 
to  be  over  a  light  line  when  they  cross,  and  a  pale  line 
seems  to  run  under  a  very  black  line  at  a  crossing. 
Under  such  conditions  it  may  be  impossible  to  determine 
which  was  last  made.  A  light  line  made  rapidly  may 
not  to  any  appreciable  extent  run  out  on  a  heavy  line, 
and  it  may  be  so  thin  and  light  that  when  it  is  crossed 
the  second  line  does  not  run  out  on  it  as  it  does  on  a 
distinct  strong  line.  If  a  light  line  is  crossed  at  once 
while  it  is  still  damp  by  a  heavy  line  the  spreading  of 
the  second  line  on  the  first  is  unmistakable. 

If  a  dark  and  heavy  soluble  ink,  like  nigrosine,  is 
crossed  by  a  decidedly  lighter  ink,  or  a  colored  ink,  and 
the  second  strokes  are  full  and  strong  a  condition  may 
be  shown  that  may  lead  to  an  erroneous  conclusion.  If 
the  first  ink  is  sufficiently  soluble  the  two  lines  may 
coalesce  at  the  crossing  and  the  stain  of  the  first  line 
.  may  extend  slightly  out  on  the  light  or  colored  line,  ap- 
parently showing  that  the  dark  line  was  made  last.  Care- 
ful examination  under  these  conditions  will  show  an 
indefinite  edge  to  such  a  stain  and  a  mixture  of  the  two 
inks  instead  of  the  running  out  of  one  on  the  other. 

Crossed  lines  in  other  parts  of  the  same  document 
should,  if  possible,  always  be  compared  with  those  in 
question  if  in  the  crossing  in  dispute  it  is  probable  that 
the  second  writing  followed  the  first  within  a  short  time 
or  while  the  first  line  was  still  slightly  damp.  Ordinary 
commercial  writing  fluid,  now  in  almost  universal  use 
in  business,  will  dry  very  quickly  or  become  absorbed 
and  fixed  in  the  paper  in  a  few  seconds  so  that  a  "t" 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES  387 

crossing  made  across  a  letter  at  the  beginning  of  a  long 
word  is  frequently  across  a  line  entirely  absorbed  in  the 
paper  but  still  damp,  and  the  result  in  such  a  case  can 
be  compared  with  the  actual  crossing  in  dispute  on  the 
same  document  if  it  is  probable  that  it  was  made  under 
similar  conditions.  Shaded  lines  three  one  hundred  and 
twenty  eighths  of  an  inch  in  width,  written  with  common 
fluid  ink  on  ordinary  calendered  foolscap  paper  in  the 
month  of  May,  under  average  conditions  of  humidity, 
require  sixty  seconds  to  be  entirely  absorbed  in  the  paper 
so  no  ink  is  taken  up  with  a  blotter.  Nigrosine  ink 
under  similar  conditions  requires  about  twenty  seconds 
longer  to  be  absorbed.  This  time  of  absorption  is  of 
course  much  longer  in  well  sized  hard  paper  than  in 
soft  porous  paper. 

Where  two  ink  lines  are  made  with  different  inks  a 
close  direct  examination  of  the  crossing  may  show 
which  line  is  continuous  by  the  arrangement  of  the  ink 
film  or  the  condition  and  coloring  of  the  disturbed  paper 
fiber.  If  an  ink  line  which  has  been  made  dull  in  color 
or  dead  black  by  the  use  of  the  blotter  is  crossed  by  a 
line  showing  a  gloss  or  lustre,  and  the  second  line  con- 
tains a  considerable  quantity  of  ink,  the  bright  line  will 
be  continuous,  and  if  the  dull  ink  line  is  made  last  the 
first  line  may  be  dulled  or  dimmed  at  the  point  of  inter- 
section, although  it  is  dangerous  to  base  a  positive  judg- 
ment upon  this  fact  alone  since  the  combination  of  the 
two  inks  may  show  a  result  different  from  that  which 
either  alone  would  show. 

It  has  been  proposed  in  a  discussion  of  this  subject 
that  a  letter-press  copy  of  crossed  lines  should  be  made 
in  order  to  determine  their  sequence,  but  this  should 


388  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

never  be  permitted.  Such  a  test  will  rarely  show  any 
definite  result  whatever  and  will  render  it  impossible  to 
make  any  further  intelligent  examination  of  the  condi- 
tions by  any  method.  Comparison  should  be  made  with 
ink  lines  the  sequence  of  which  is  known,  and  the  larger 
the  number  of  examples  for  comparison  the  better. 

If  the  lines  of  writing  are  thick  enough  to  be  ap- 
preciable and  stand  up  on  the  paper,  the  upper  continu- 
ous line  may  plough  through  the  first  and  thus  show  that 
it  was  last  made,  or  possibly  may  show  its  additional 
height  above  the  surface  of  the  paper  at  the  crossing. 
This  may  be  observed  under  high  magnification  by  hold- 
ing the  surface  of  the  paper  nearly  on  a  line  with  the 
eye,  as  directed  above,  so  as  to  look  towards  the  side  of 
the  ink  line.  The  paper  should  be  held  so  that  neither 
ink  line  will  be  at  right  angles  to  the  line  of  vision  but 
so  that  both  are  equally  divergent.  This  position  is 
important,  as  otherwise,  especially  when  a  high  power 
objective  is  used,  one  line  will  be  in  focus  and  the  other 
not,  and  the  line  in  focus  will  appear  to  be  the  continuous 
line  and  apparently  the  last  one  made.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  however,  few  ink  lines  are  heavy  enough  to  show 
a  thickness  sufficient  to  render  this  method  of  examina- 
tion practicable.  If  the  first  line  is  ploughed  through 
by  the  pen  in  making  the  second,  then  thick  ink  may 
render  it  easier  to  determine  which  stroke  was  made  last. 

If  the  last  line  is  actually  higher  at  the  crossing  it  will 
be  necessary  under  direct  view  and  very  high  magnifica- 
tion to  change  slightly  the  focus  of  the  microscope  to 
get  first  one  and  then  the  other  line  in  sharp  focus  and, 
of  course,  the  line  farthest  away  will  be  the  under  line. 

An  ink  line  of  good  density  if  made  over  a  pencil 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES 


389 


stroke  will  usually  cover  the  stroke  in  such  manner  that 
the  pen  stroke  will  be  seen  to  be  the  last  made,  but  here 
again  the  width  and  weight  of  the  strokes  greatly  affect 
the  result.  The  sequence  of  two  pencil  strokes  can  be 
determined  if  the  strokes  are  made  with  considerable 
pressure  so  as  to  indent  the  paper  slightly.  Indenta- 
tions of  this  character,  even  if  very  slight,  can  be  seen 
with  the  stereoscopic  microscope.  The  upper  line  will 
show  a  continuous  indentation  across  the  lower,  similar 
to  two  crossed  strokes  on  a  piece  of  wax,  and  the  upper 
line  in  some  instances  will  show,  under  just  the  proper 
angle,  distinct  bright  scratches  or  bright  lines  in  the 
stroke  itself  across  the  first  or  lower  line. 

A  distinct  pencil  stroke  over  an  ink  line  usually 
shows,  when  examined  from  just  the  right  angle,  con- 
t  i  n  u  o  u  s  u  n- 
dimmed  metallic 
lustre  which  is 
broken  or  dulled 
at  the  crossing 
when  the  ink  line 
is  last  made. 

For  nearly  all 
line  crossing  ex- 
aminations, ink 
as  well  as  pencil, 
the  stereoscopic 
microscope  is  pre- 
ferable. This  in- 
strument shows 

hills  and  furrOWS      FIG.  161— Pencil  lines  over  and  under  ink.  The  first, 

third  and  fifth  pencil  lines  it  is  clearly 
and       miCrOSCOplC  seen  are  over  the  ink  strokes. 


390  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

indentations  that  cannot  be  seen  with  the  ordinary  micro- 
scope even  if  the  highest  power  objective  is  used.  In 
such  an  examination  the  matter  of  proper  lighting  must 
be  carefully  considered,  and  it  is  sometimes  highly  im- 
portant that  photo-micrographs  be  promptly  made  be- 
fore the  microscopic  conditions  are  accidentally  or  inten- 
tionally disturbed.  The  facts  in  an  apparently  hopeless 
case  may  be  so  clearly  shown  by  skillfully  made  illustra- 
tions that  the  case  does  not  get  into  court. 

Fluid  ink  writing  over  a  fresh  impression  made  by 
a  rubber  stamp  inked  with  the  ordinary  ink  pad,  will 

run  out  slightly 
where  it  touches  the 
rubber  stamp  impres- 
sion. If  the  stamp 
impression  is  allowed 
to  dry  thoroughly  be- 
fore the  writing  is 
written  over  it  the 
ink  will  not  run  out 
as  it  does  on  a  damp 

-Ink  lines  over  typewriting.  ^     ^        p^     ^ 

ink  written  lines  over  typewritten  letters  do  not  run  out 
and  combine  with  the  ink  of  the  type  impression  as  they 
do  on  a  damp  pen  line  or  damp  stamp  impression.  Ink 
strokes  over  typewriting  are  actually  repelled  when  the 
lines  touch  as  if  written  over  a  greasy  paper  and  this 
condition  will  indicate  that  the  writing  followed  the 
typewriting. 

The  matter  of  determining  the  comparative  age  of 
two  writings  by  the  line  crossings  is  an  inquiry  quite  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  showing  which  was  last  made.  A 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES  391 

dispute  sometimes  arises  as  to  whether  two  writings  were 
written  within  a  few  minutes  of  each  other,  within  a  few 
hours  or  a  year  or  more  apart.  As  we  have  seen,  if  an 
absorbed  but  still  damp  line  is  crossed  by  a  well  filled 
fresh  line  the  ink  will  run  out  on  the  first  line  in  a  very 
pronounced  manner  and  if  this  condition  exists  it  is  clear 
that  the  second  writing  followed  soon  after  the  first; 
and  if  the  second  line  does  not  run  out  on  the  first  in  the 
slightest  degree  it  is  probable  that  the  second  writing 
was  long  enough  after  the  first  so  that  the  first  had  be- 
come oxidized  and  set.  From  these  facts  it  will  be  seen 
that  it  may  be  very  evident  that  a  second  writing  must 
have  followed  a  first  within  a  few  minutes  and  other  con- 
ditions will  sometimes  show  that  a  second  writing  must 
have  been  added  some  considerable  time  later.  As  a  rule, 
no  very  positive  conclusion  should  be  based  on  these 
phenomena  unless  the  lines  are  clear  and  distinct.  This 
is  one  of  the  subjects  upon  which  the  pretender  may  be 
led  to  give  most  positive  testimony  on  the  very  slightest 
foundation. 

As  suggested  above  it  is  sometimes  important  in 
crossed  line  inquiries  that  the  photo-micrographs  should 
be  made  at  the  earliest  opportunity;  illustrations  of 
this  class  are  desirable  in  every  such  investigation  and 
sometimes  are  essential  if  the  facts  are  to  be  clearly 
shown.  It  is  wrell  to  make  such  illustrations  under 
various  lightings  and  enlarged  from  ten  to  forty  diame- 
ters. Great  care  should  be  exercised  to  get  the  sharpest 
possible  focus  and  if  possible  different  lengths  of 
exposure  should  be  given  until  just  the  proper  degree  of 
contrast  is  obtained.  If  properly  made  such  photo- 
graphs alone  will  sometimes  decide  a  case. 


392 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


The  order  of  writing  as  shown  by  crossed  strokes, 
even  on  very  fine  lines,  is  so  unmistakable  in  some  cases 
that  when  properly  illustrated  the  fact  must  be  admitted. 
But  it  does  not  by  any  means  follow,  as  was  suggested 
at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter,  that  in  every  case  the 
fact  can  be  conclusively  shown.  In  many  instances  it 
is  impossible  by  any  method  to  discover  or  showr  which 
of  two  crossed  strokes  was  last  made. 

One  who  makes  a  serious  study  of  the  subject  should 


FIG.  163 — A  few  examples  of  "crossed  lines"  of  various  dates  with  a  variety  of 
inks  and  on  various  papers. 


SEQUENCE  OF  CROSSED  STROKES  393 

make  specimens  for  comparison  and  study  with  all  kinds, 
classes  and  conditions  of  ink,  on  all  kinds  of  papers,  with 
light,  heavy  and  blotted  strokes  made  slowly  and  rapidly 
and  at  intervals  of  a  few  seconds  up  to  several  years. 
With  such  a  collection  of  actual  examples  for  compari- 
son regarding  which  the  facts  are  known,  the  possibility 
of  error  is  much  reduced. 

\No  matter  how  well  qualified  as  a  scientist  or  micro- 
scopist  a  witness  may  apparently  be,  unless  he  has  made 
and  carefully  studied  such  actual  examples  of  known 
crossed  lines  his  opinion  on  the  subject  should  be  received 
with  much  caution1. 


Certain  witnesses,  apparently  having  especial  experience,  and 
seeming-  to  have  especial  knowledge,  have  testified  that  the  addresses 
were  written  after  the  cancellation  stamps,  or  the  impressions  of  the 
postofflces,  were  placed  upon  the  envelopes,  and  that  some  of  these 
stamps  or  impressions,  as  well  as  certain  of  the  receiving  and  back 
stamps  on  the  envelopes,  were  made  by  dies  not  in  use  in  the  post- 
office  department,  or  by  authorized  dies,  which  in  the  detail  of  dates 
and  otherwise,  have  been  tampered  with  and  are  not  genuine  imprints 
made  by  postoffice  employees 

The  specialists  for  the  respondents  testified  that  the  appearance  of 
superposition  of  inks  of  different  ingredients  and  of  varying  densities, 
after  the  writing  and  stamping  had  been  done,  was  deceptive  and 
entirely  misleading,  and  that,  in  many  instances,  which  was  above  the 
other,  or  last  applied,  could  not  be  determined  by  any  method,  inspec- 
tion or  examination.  Finally  a  postoffice  employee,  bringing  into  court 
an  official  stamp,  appeared  as  a  witness,  and  by  actual  experiment 
demonstrated  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  court  that  the  contention  of 
the  respondents  was  correct.  It  appeared  that  the  heavier  or  darker 
writing  or  imprint  most  frequently  appeared  to  be  on  the  top  of  the 
lighter  impression.  ... 

Grossly  improbable,  as  those  accusations  of  forgery  and  fraud  may 
have  seemed  to  be,  the  court  was  obliged  to  hear  the  evidence,  start- 
ing, as  it  did,  with  the  confident  specific  statements  of  specialists,  by 
the  recitation  of  their  experience,  qualifying  as  learned  and  skilled. — 
By  Hon.  George  F.  Lawton,  Surrogate,  Cambridge,  Mass.,  in  a  decision 
in  Matter  of  Russell,  April  13,  1910. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

WRITING  OVER  FOLDS  IN  PAPER 

It  is  sometimes  possible  to  show  conclusively  that  a 
paper  was  folded  before  certain  writing  was  placed  up- 
on it,  and  the  proof  of  this  fact  may  be  a  matter  of  vital 
importance  in  the  investigation  of  the  date  of  a  writing, 
or  in  the  examination  of  an  alleged  fraudulent  change 
in  a  document.  To  show  that  the  writing  followed  the 
folding  sometimes  casts  grave  suspicion  upon  a  docu- 
ment and  may  even  be  sufficient  to  prove  that  it  is 
fraudulent,  or  that  it  contains  a  fraudulent  alteration, 
addition  or  interlineation.  It  has  been  shown  that  a 
fraudulent  document  was  written  over  a  genuine  signa- 
ture by  showing  that  a  continuous  fold  across  the  sheet 
followed  the  writing  of  the  signature  and  preceded  the 
writing  of  the  body  of  the  document. 

As  is  well  known,  a  sheet  of  paper  is  a  compacted 
mass  of  short  fibers,  and  when  it  is  folded  one  side  is 
necessarily  compressed  and  wrinkled  and  the  opposite 
side  pulled  apart  or  actually  fractured,  and,  as  paper 
fibers  are  only  slightly  elastic,  it  is  impossible  ever  to  get 
the  parts  back  into  their  original  condition  and  relation 
to  each  other.  The  effect  of  the  folding  process  neces- 
sarily depends  upon  the  quality  and  thickness  of  the 
paper,  upon  the  closeness  of  the  fold  or  amount  of  pres- 
sure put  upon  the  paper  when  folded,  and  also  upon 
the  number  of  times  that  the  paper  has  been  folded  and 
unfolded. 

[394] 


WRITING  OVER  FOLDS  395 

Even  one  ordinary  folding  of  a  sheet  of  writing  paper, 
pressed  down  in  the  ordinary  way,  inevitably  disturbs 
the  fibers  on  both  sides  of  the  sheet,  makes  the  surface 
uneven  and  at  least  to  some  extent  changes  the  porous 
character  of  the  folded  portion,  so  that  it  may  distinctly 
affect  the  character,  direction  or  width  of  a  line  where 
it  crosses  the  fold.  If  one  or  more  distinct  strokes  or 
parts  of  letters  cross  the  folded  portion  of  the  paper, 
and  particularly  if  there  are  other  lines  for  comparison 
on  the  same  document,  which  were  written  before  it  was 
folded,  it  is  usually  possible  to  show  (see  Fig.  28)  that 
part  of  the  writing  preceded  the  folding  and  part  fol- 
lowed it. 

It  may  occur  that  the  writing  in  question  on  a  docu- 
ment was  written  so  long  after  the  first  writing  that  the 
folded  portion  of  the  paper,  which  has  served  as  a  hinge, 
is  so  broken  and  porous  that  the  pen  actually  sticks  into 
or  through  the  paper  at  this  point,  and  a  portion  of  the 
ink  may  actually  have  run  through  to  the  opposite  side 
of  the  sheet.  Such  a  condition  would,  of  course,  be  un- 
questionable evidence  that  the  paper  was  folded  before 
the  last  writing. 

Good  paper  may  be  folded  many  times  without  being 
actually  fractured,  while  some  papers  are  broken  on  one 
side  by  one  ordinary  folding,  and  therefore  the  results 
in  writing  over  the  folded  portions  may  vary  greatly 
under  varying  conditions.  Tough,  thick  papers  may 
not  be  broken,  but  it  is  difficult  to  make  such  papers  lie 
flat  even  after  one  folding  which  produces  a  ridge  on 
the  outside  of  the  fold  and  a  hollow  on  the  inside,  and 
this  unevenness  alone  may  affect  the  added  writing  in 
such  a  distinctive  way  as  to  show  that  it  was  written 


396  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

after  the  fold  was  made.  Strokes  across  ridges  due  to 
folds  are  apt  to  appear  widest,  because  of  the  obstruc- 
tion, at  the  side  of  the  ridge  first  touched  by  the  moving 
pen  or  pencil.  It  is  important  that  the  direction  of  the 
stroke  should  always  be  considered  in  such  an  inquiry. 

The  concave  or  inner  side  of  a  fold  is  lower  than  the 
other  parts  of  the  sheet  and  with  good  strong  paper  a 
pronounced  hollow  extends  the  whole  length  of  the  fold 
on  the  inner  side.  If  such  paper  is  folded  but  a  few 
times  the  paper  will  not  be  likely  to  be  broken  or  made 
much  more  porous  at  the  fold,  but  pen  strokes  may  show 
gaps  or  lighter  places  where  the  pen  jumps  over  the 
hollow;  or  strokes  at  such  a  point  may  show  an  unusual 
change  of  direction  just  where  the  fold  is  situated.  The 
concave  or  inner  side  of  the  fold  does  not  affect  a  pen 
stroke  in  so  pronounced  a  manner  as  the  convex  side. 
In  writing  over  the  ridge  of  a  horizontal  fold  on  hard 
paper  the  upward  strokes  in  slant  writing  may  be  slight- 
ly deflected  to  the  right  and  downward  strokes  to  the 
left.  Upward  strokes  meet  more  resistance  as  the  point 
of  the  pen  as  ordinarily  held  comes  more  directly  against 
the  ridge  and  is  more  likely  to  stick  in  it  and  stop. 

The  surface  of  hard  calendered  paper  of  the  ordinary 
legal  and  foolscap  quality  is  made  smooth  by  heavy 
pressure,  while  the  interior  of  the  sheet  is  more  porous. 
A  very  few  foldings  of  such  paper  render  it  very  porous 
and  spongy  at  the  fold,  and  ordinary  fluid  ink  runs  into 
a  fold  as  it  would  into  a  blotter  and  widens  and  changes 
the  character  of  the  line  at  that  point  in  an  unmistak- 
able manner.  While  this  effect,  as  stated  above,  will 
show  soonest  on  the  convex  side  of  the  paper,  it  will  show 
on  either  side  after  a  few  foldings  and  unfoldings. 


WRITING  OVER  FOLDS  397 

Even  a  very  fine  hair  line  will  often  show  a  decided 
widening  just  at  the  fold  and  the  ink  from  a  shaded 
line  will  run  out  both  ways  at  the  junction  of  the  shade 
and  the  fold.  Papers  made  from  wood  are  easily  broken 
by  folding,  on  account  of  the  shortness  of  the  fibers, 
and  ink  lines  over  folds  in  such  paper  are  changed  in  a 
pronounced  manner. 

The  character  of  the  result  of  writing  over  a  fold  is 
modified  by  the  character  of  the  ink  used.  If  the  ink 
is  very  limpid  and  easily  absorbed  it  will  show  in  a  more 
pronounced  manner  that  a  writing  is  over  a  fold  than 
if  the  ink  is  thick  and  heavy.  One  of  the  commendable 
qualities  of  the  commercial  writing  fluids  in  common 
use  is  that  the  extreme  fluidity  of  the  ink  carries  it  into 
the  fiber  of  the  paper,  where  it  oxidizes  and  forms  a 
permanent  record.  This  quality  makes  the  ink  very 
sensitive  to  changes  in  the  porous  character  of  the  paper 
and  writing  over  a  fold  with  this  ink  is  therefore  more 
likely  to  show  a  pronounced  result.  Ink  that  deposits 
its  color  mainly  on  the  surface  of  the  paper,  like  nigro- 
sine,  and  all  inks  of  the  character  that  carry  coloring 
matter  in  suspension  instead  of  in  chemical  solution,  do 
not  show  so  plainly  that  a  line  was  written  over  a  fold. 
These  inks  in  their  application  to  the  surface  of  paper 
resemble  paint,  and  differ  radically  from  a  limpid  fluid 
that  is  almost  instantly  absorbed. 

When  a  line  is  first  written  and  the  paper  afterwards 
folded  and  partly  broken,  after  the  ink  becomes  dry 
(see  Fig.  28)  there  is  a  distinct  break  in  the  ink  film 
itself,  showing  a  line  of  unstained  paper  fiber  beneath, 
the  main  pen  stroke  is  no  wider  at  the  point  of  fracture 
on  each  side,  and  the  broken  portion  of  the  paper  does 


398  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

not  show  ink  stains  excepting  on  the  fractured  and 
frayed  ends  of  the  fibers  which  made  up  the  original 
line.  If  the  line  was  made  after  the  fold  and  the  paper 
is  afterwards  fractured,  the  ink  stains  at  the  point  of 
fracture  will  he  distinctly  wider  than  the  line  each  side 
of  the  broken  place.  A  line  which  was  made  before  the 
paper  was  folded  may  at  first  appear  slightly  wider 
where  it  is  broken,  but  careful  examination  will  show 
that  this  apparent  widening  is  due  entirely  to  the  frayed 
or  loose  ends  of  the  stained  paper  fiber.  If  a  line  is  com- 
pletely broken  and  the  ends  separated  at  a  fold  it  may 
be  impossible  to  determine  which  was  first,  the  writing 
or  the  folding. 

The  effect  of  the  change  in  the  line  over  a  fold  may 
not  be  very  apparent  until  the  ink  has  completely  oxi- 
dized and  reached  its  fullest  intensity  of  blackness. 
Fresh  writing  with  ordinary  fluid  ink  over  a  folded  sheet 
will  not  show  distinctly  the  phenomena  described,  but 
the  same  crossing  after  the  ink  turns  black  may  show  in 
a  very  pronounced  manner  the  characteristics  outlined. 
A  pencil  stroke  over  a  fold  may  not  be  affected  to  any 
great  extent,  but  on  some  kinds  of  hard  paper  it  may 
be  possible  to  show  clearly  that  the  writing  followed  the 
folding.  In  the  investigation  of  a  question  of  this 
kind  the  stereoscopic  photo-micrograph  is  particularly 
desirable. 

Examination  of  writing  over  folded  paper  should  be 
made  with  a  microscope  with  good  light  and  no  opinion 
should  be  given  until  a  microscopic  examination  has  been 
made.  Examination  with  the  microscope  under  a 
magnification  of  from  thirty  to  fifty  diameters  will 
usually  show  the  conditions  with  the  greatest  distinctness. 


WRITING  OVER  FOLDS  399 

Illustrations. 

The  startling  clearness  with  which  many  of  these 
questions  can  be  illustrated  by  stereoscopic  photo- 
micrographs can  only  be  appreciated  by  an  actual 
examination  of  such  illustrations.  Even  those  repro- 
duced herewith  in  half-tone  show  clearly  the  fact,  but 
are  necessarily  much  inferior  to  actual  photographs. 

Vehement  denial  is  sometimes  made  of  facts  that  be- 
come perfectly  evident  when  thus  illustrated  and  the 
absence  or  exclusion  of  appropriate  illustrations  may 
defeat  the  ends  of  justice.  This  unfortunate  result  is 
especially  liable  to  be  reached  in  any  controversy  regard- 
ing matters  of  the  character  discussed  in  this  and  the 
preceding  chapter  involving  questions  of  a  microscopic 
character  which  necessarily  are  in  a  measure  hidden  and 
indistinct.  An  investigation  of  the  relation  of  a  writing 
to  a  fold  in  a  sheet  of  paper,  or  of  the  sequence  of  two 
strokes  that  cross,  are  matters  to  which  the  average 
juryman  or  referee  has  never  given  a  moment's  atten- 
tion and  to  ask  such  men  to  decide  such  a  question  with- 
out giving  them  every  possible  assistance  amounts  to  a 
leap  in  the  dark.  It  will  readily  be  seen  by  the  illustra- 
tions shown  that  many  delicate  and  almost  invisible 
characteristics  can  be  proved  so  positively  that  to  deny 
their  existence  is  simply  ridiculous. 

These  stereoscopic  photographs  should  be  enlarged 
from  about  twenty  to  sixty  diameters,  and,  with  proper 
care  and  attention  to  details,  can  readily  be  made  by 
following  the  directions  given  in  the  chapter  on  photog- 
raphy. In  order  to  view  such  illustrations  the  ordinary 
stereoscope  is  required,  and  there  are  no  valid  objections 
to  its  use  if  it  assists  in  showing  the  facts. 


400  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

There  is  always  violent  opposition  to  any  innovation 
in  legal  processes,  but  the  science  of  the  law  has  kept 
abreast  of  the  progress  of  the  physical  sciences  only  by 
the  recognition  and  employment  of  improved  methods 
by  means  of  which  the  facts  may  be  more  clearly  shown. 
If  it  is  made  to  appear  by  clear,  positive  testimony  that 
in  certain  inquiries  a  stereoscopic  photograph  will  illus- 
trate, explain  and  enforce  oral  testimony  and  that  with- 
out this  illustration,  testimony  would  in  some  measure 
be  weakened  and  made  ineffective,  the  exclusion  of  such 
a  photograph  would  undoubtedly  in  some  states  afford 
good  ground  for  reversal  on  appeal. 


FIG.  167 — An  illustration  made  to  show  the  important  bearing  that  the  question  may 
may  have  as  to  whether  a  writing  preceded  or  followed  a  folding  of  the  paper. 

THE  STEREOSCOPIC  ILLUSTRATIONS. 

In  Fig\  168  is  shown  the  top  of,  the  small  "h"  in  "Charles"  where  it 
is  broken  by  the  fold,  showing-  clearly  that  the  writing  must  have  pre- 
ceded the  folding. 

In  Fig.  169  is  illustrated  the  last  stroke  in  the  word  "from"  which 
shows  unmistakably  that  the  writing  followed  the  folding;  it  therefore 
necessarily  follows  that  the  lines  of  the  body  of  the  note  were  written 
after  the  signature. 

In  order  that  the  illustrations  may  be  conveniently  seen  in  the 
ordinary  stereoscopic  instrument  they  are  printed  on  a  detached  folded 
sheet  and  enclosed  in  an  envelope  inside  of  the  back  cover  of  this  book. 

Fig.  170  is  another  illustration  of  a  writing  before  folding  (the 
upper  one)  and  a  writing  after  a  folding  of  the  paper. 


WRITING  OVER  FOLDS 


401 


402 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


WRITING  OVER  FOLDS 


403 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  IN  DOCUMENTS 

If  for  any  reason  a  document  is  under  suspicion  it 
should  in  all  cases  be  thoroughly  examined  for  the  pur- 
pose of  discovering  any  suspicious  erasures  or  altera- 
tions that  it  may  contain.  Fraudulent  changes  naturally 
are  made  in  such  a  way  as  to  avoid  detection  and  may 
not  be  discovered  if  attention  is  not  directed  to  this 
particular  subject1. 

Many  questions  of  importance  arise  regarding  altera- 
tions in  documents  and  the  questions  are  presented  in  a 
great  variety  of  forms.  It  may  only  be  necessary  to 
determine  whether  a  change  or  erasure  has  actually  been 
made2,  or  it  may  be  a  matter  of  great  importance  to  show 

1ERASURES.  .  .  .  the  question  has  also  seriously  been  con- 
sidered whether  an  expert  may  testify  as  to  the  existence  or  time  of 
erasures,  alterations,  or  interpolations.  Such  testimony  is  often  not  to 
be  distinguished  practically  from  testimony  deciphering  illegible  writ- 
ing, which  has  uniformly  been  held  proper.  There  is,  at  any  rate,  no 
scintilla  of  reason  for  doubt. — Wigmore  on  Evidence,  Vol.  Ill,  Sec. 
2027  (1904). 

2The  question,  what  are  really  the  words  in  a  written  instrument, 
when  they  are  doubtful  either  on  account  of  the  obscure  manner  in 
which  they  are  written,  or  because  of  an  uncertainty  on  the  face  of  the 
writing,  whether  any  of  them  have  been  stricken  out  or  altered,  by  the 
maker,  is  a  question  of  fact;  and  if  such  question  arises  in  a  cause 
being  tried  by  a  jury,  this  question  of  fact  should  be  submitted  to  the 
jury,  and  the  evidence  of  experts  on  the  question,  what  are  the  words 
in  the  writing,  ought  to  be  received;  and  if  the  court  refused  to  permit 
such  evidence  to  go  to  the  jury,  this  court  ought  to  reverse  such  action 
of  the  court  below. — Beach  vs.  O'Riley,  14  W.  Va.,  55  (1878),  L.  R.  A., 
65,  155. 

The  alteration  or  interlineation  should  be  explained  by  the  party 
claiming  the  benefit  of  the  paper,  and  if  it  is  suspicious  in  appearance 
and  satisfactory  explanation  is  not  made,  the  proper  conclusion  is  a 
conviction  of  fact  against  the  instrument. — Catlin  Coal  Co.  vs.  Lloyd, 
180  111.  406  (1899). 
[404] 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  405 

what  was  first  W7ritten.  Sometimes  the  whole  inquiry 
is  regarding  the  change  in  a  word,  or  even  of  one  figure 
or  part  of  a  figure  in  a  date  or  an  amount,  and  again  it 
may  be  possible  to  prove  that  a  whole  document,  with 
the  exception  of  the  signature,  has  been  erased  and  a 
new7  and  fraudulent  document  written  above  the  genuine 
signature.  Wills,  notes  and  other  important  documents 
have  been  manufactured  in  this  way1. 

The  most  common  and  clumsy  form  of  erasure  is  by 
abrasion,  by  which  method  the  paper  fiber  itself  con- 
taining the  ink  is  actually  removed  taking  the  ink  with 
it.  Such  erasures  are  usually  perfectly  apparent  when 
carefully  examined  but  may  be  so  skillfully  made  as  to 
escape  detection  on  first  view.  If  the  attempt  has  been 
made  to  write  with  ink  over  such  an  erasure  the  resulting 
conditions  will  usually  show  very  plainly  that  an  erasure 
was  first  made,  because  it  is  inevitable  that  the  operation 
of  making  the  erasure  has  so  disturbed  the  fiber  (see 
Fig.  31 )  that  the  paper  is  more  porous  and  the  ink  makes 
a  mark  distinctly  different  from  that  on  other  portions 
of  the  same  sheet. 

The  line  is  to  some  extent  wider  and  rougher  than  it 
would  otherwise  be  and  the  ink  runs  out  side  wise  form- 
ing a  series  of  minute  points  extending  in  both  directions 
from  the  stroke.  The  ink  line  is  also  usually  somewhat 
dulled  in  color  and  without  lustre,  but  may  be  a  deeper 
black  than  on  undisturbed  portions  of  the  paper.  Writ- 
ing over  an  erasure  will  sometimes  show  through  on  the 
opposite  side  of  the  sheet.  The  attempt  may  have  been 


'These  questions  had  for  their  object  to  elicit  testimony  tending  to 
show  that  the  note  was  written  over  the  signature  of  Allen,  and  after 
it  was  written. — Dubois  vs.  Baker,  30  N.  Y.  (361)  1864. 


406  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

made  to  smooth  or  rub  down  the  erasure  before  writing, 
and  if  this  is  skilfully  done  on  good  paper  the  ink  line 
at  such  point  may  show  but  little  if  any  difference  from 
a  normal  line  until  it  is  looked  at  under  proper  magnifica- 
tion. A  microscopic  examination  of  the  paper  will 
always  show  a  distinct  difference  in  the  quality  of  the 
line  due  to  the  disturbance  of  the  fiber  and  the  rough- 
ening of  the  surface  of  the  paper. 

Examination  should  be  made  with  good  light  falling 
on  the  document  at  various  angles  and  with  the  micro- 
scope tube  or  magnifier  held  at  various  angles  to  get  an 
exact  view  of  the  gloss  or  lustre  of  the  paper  surface, 
and  examination  should  always  be  made  under  various 
degrees  of  magnification.  Too  high  magnification  may 
be  as  undesirable  as  that  which  is  too  low.  The  slightest 
disturbance  of  the  surface  of  smooth  paper  can  readily 
be  detected  by  holding  the  sheet  so  that  the  angle  of 
reflection  from  the  portion  in  question  is  exactly  on  a 
line  with  the  eye.  The  portion  disturbed  will  look  darker 
simply  because  it  will  not  reflect  as  much  light  as  the 
smoother  portions  of  the  paper. 

Examination  should  also  be  made  by  transmitted  light 
which  may  show  what  otherwise  is  not  clearly  seen.  A 
transmitted  light  photograph  of  a  portion  of  the  docu- 
ment (see  Fig.  6)  including  the  place  in  question  affords 
an  effective  means  of  comparing  the  transparency  or 
opacity  of  various  portions  of  the  paper.  This  test  is 
more  fully  outlined  in  the  chapter  on  photography1. 

xThe  clumsy  attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  obliterate  part  of  a 
writing-  by  covering  the  first  word  or  character  written  by  a  blot  or 
by  smearing  it  over  with  ink,  thus  covering-  it  up  and  making  it  illegible. 
The  changed  word  or  character  is  then  written  above  or  at  one  side. 
If  the  ink  in  the  first  word  written  had  become  fixed  in  the  paper  be- 
fore the  change  was  made,  a  view  of  the  part  by  strong  transmitted 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  407 

One  of  the  most  common  of  forgeries  is  the  "raised" 
check,  draft,  or  other  commercial  paper  which  is  made 
to  represent  a  larger  sum  than  when  it  was  signed.  This 
is  a  very  dangerous  kind  of  forgery  as  the  signature 
which  it  carries  is  genuine  and  when  a  paper  is  presented 
for  payment  or  credit  special  attention  is  naturally 
directed  only  to  the  signature. 

Genuine  documents  are  sometimes  so  carelessly  drawn 
that  the  amount  is  increased  by  simply  adding  words  be- 
fore or  after  the  smaller  amount  first  written,  and  then 
adding  ciphers  to  the  amount  written  in  figures  or,  if 
necessary,  changing  the  amount  in  figures.  In  this  way 
"Twenty-four"  is  made  to  read  "Twenty-four  hun- 
dred" or  "Twenty- four  thousand,"  or  "One  hundred"  is 
changed  to  "Twenty-one  hundred."  If,  however, 
papers  are  properly  drawn  it  is  impossible  to  make  such 
changes  without  first  making  some  kind  of  an  erasure. 

There  have  been  numerous  cases  in  which  notes, 
orders,  receipts,  and  other  papers  were  purposely  drawn 
in  such  a  manner  that  they  might  easily  be  changed  after 
being  signed  or  paid.  This  is  accomplished  in  some 
cases  by  writing  the  amount  only  in  figures  when  the 
paper  was  signed,  or  by  leaving  open  spaces  in  amount 
lines  that  later  could  easily  be  filled  in.  Adding  ciphers 
of  course  multiplies  by  ten  and  amounts  like  100  or 
1000.  written  only  in  figures,  are  easily  changed  to  400 
or  4000  by  changing  the  one  to  a  four  simply  by  the 

light,  by  the  use  of  a  focusing  glass  or  by  looking  through  a  tube  to  cut 
off  all  side  light,  will  often  render  the  first  word  written  perfectly 
legible.  The  lines  first  written,  although  completely  covered,  will  be 
more  opaque  than  the  other  parts  and  can  thus  be  seen  and  read.  This 
method  of  examination  with  a  strong  light  and  focusing  glass  or  a 
tube  is  frequently  of  great  assistance  in  examining  various  questions 
in  connection  with  many  classes  of  disputed  documents. 


408  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

addition  without  erasure  of  the  first  part  of  the  four  to 
the  figure  1.  In  the  same  manner  the  figure  1  may  be 
changed  to  7  or  9,  and  3's  may  be  changed  to  8's. 

If  a  document  has  been  raised  by  simply  adding  to 
it  a  word  or  a  figure  which  has  not  required  any  erasure 
it  may  be  impossible  to  show  that  any  change  has  been 
made.  If  the  change  or  addition  has,  however,  touched 
any  previous  writing  it  is  usually  possible  to  show  an 
unnatural  order  in  the  writing.  In  some  cases,  for 
example,  it  is  possible  to  show  (see  Fig.  33)  that  a 
figure  4  or  9,  or  7,  was  made  from  a  figure  1  by  showing 
that  the  left  side  of  the  figure  was  made  last  or  added  to 
the  figure  1,  or  the  last  or  added  part  may  have  been 
written  with  a  different  kind  of  ink.  A  fraudulent 
addition,  if  in  words,  will  almost  invariably  show  a  dif- 
ferent slant  or  size  or  a  general  unnaturalness  that  in- 
dicates a  different  time  of  writing,  or,  as  stated,  the 
added  part  may  be  written  with  an  ink  that  shows  a  lack 
of  uniformity  or  continuity  when  compared  with  the  ink 
first  used. 

If  before  a  change  is  made  a  previous  writing  must 
be  erased,  the  operation  of  producing  such  a  forgery  is 
necessarily  made  much  more  difficult,  but  it  is  not  by 
any  means  prevented.  Even  school  children  know  that 
there  are  certain  cheap  preparations  on  sale  in  stationery 
stores  that  will  successfully  remove  ordinary  ink  writ- 
ing. These  chemical  preparations  are  of  great  assistance 
to  the  forger,  and  make  it  easily  possible  in  many  cases 
for  him  to  remove  previous  writing  and  make  a  check, 
note,  receipt  or  contract  read  as  he  desires  to  have  it  read. 

These  chemical  erasures  may  affect  the  document  in 
such  a  way  as  to  show  clearly  that  it  has  been  tampered 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  409 

with,  but  when  skillfully  made  they  may  not  be  dis- 
cernible by  ordinary  observation.  All  such  chemical 
preparations  have  a  tendency  to  produce  on  white  paper, 
after  the  lapse  of  some  time,  a  pale  yellow  stain1.  On 
all  smooth  or  calendered  papers  the  application  of  any 
liquid  is  at  once  apparent,  especially  the  application  of 
a  strong  chemical  solution  which  at  once  attacks  the  siz- 
ing, dulls  the  finish  and  loosens  up  the  paper  fibers  which 
have  been  compacted  by  the  calendering  process.  On 
some  papers  such  chemical  solutions  remove  the  sizing 
so  effectually  that  ink  "runs"  or  spreads  out  as  in  blot- 
ting paper  in  a  perfectly  evident  manner.  Chemical 
erasures  show  least  upon  heavy,  rough  linen  or  bond 
paper,  which,  unfortunately,  is  the  paper  generally  used 
by  banks  for  checks  and  drafts  and  other  commercial 
papers. 

In  such  parts  of  a  writing  under  examination  the 
exact  tint  and  lustre  or  gloss  of  the  ink  should  be  com- 
pared under  various  conditions  and  angles  of  light,  as 
also  the  quality  and  exact  width  of  the  various  strokes 
of  the  writing  of  the  part  in  question.  Tests  for  evi- 
dences of  chemical  erasures  with  litmus  paper  may 
furnish  useful  information,  and  some  kinds  of  erasures, 
for  a  long  time,  can  be  detected  by  the  distinct  odor  of 
chlorinated  lime.  Tests  with  iodine  vapor,  if  properly 
made,  wrill  show  chemical  erasures  and  other  disturbances 
of  paper  surfaces,  but  such  tests  inevitably  deface  a  docu- 

aOrdinary  iron  inks  are  not  "eradicated"  or  removed  by  the  applica- 
tion of  the  so-called  ink  eradicators  but  are  simply  decolorized  and 
under  some  conditions  the  color  can  be  brought  back  to  a  sufficient 
extent  to  make  the  writing  legible  again,  as  shown  in  Fig.  4.  This 
result  is  accomplished  by  subjecting  the  writing  in  an  enclosed  re- 
ceptacle to  the  fumes  of  strong  ammonia  sulphide.  The  erased  writing 
cannot  always  be  brought  back  but  in  some  cases  can  be  and  with 
startling  results. 


410  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

ment.  Delicate  stains  due  to  chemical  erasures  are  some- 
times effectively  proved  by  photography  (see  Fig.  4) 
which  may  show  slight  differences  in  tint  with  unmis- 
takable distinctness.  The  photographic  methods  to  be 
employed  for  this  purpose  are  outlined  in  the  chapters 
on  photography  and  ink. 

Unfortunately  a  large  proportion  of  modern  blank 
forms  of  checks,  drafts  and  other  negotiable  papers  are 
made  exactly  as  the  forger  desires  in  order  that  it  may 
be  easy  to  make  fraudulent  changes.  In  the  first  place 
they  are  printed  on  rough  surface,  high  quality,  bond 
or  linen  paper  on  which  even  erasures  by  abrasion  can 
be  made  quite  successfully,  and  chemical  erasures  leave 
almost  no  trace  and  can  hardly  be  detected.  In  the 
second  place  a  large  proportion  of  such  forms  are  litho- 
graphed on  wet  paper  which  process  of  wetting  makes 
it  impossible  to  discover  any  evidence  of  a  subsequent 
wetting  when  a  chemical  erasure  is  made. 

In  addition  to  these  conditions  favorable  to  the  forger 
many  of  the  printed  devices  intended  to  prevent  raising 
not  only  do  not  serve  as  a  protection  but  may  actually 
assist  in  making  such  a  change  appear  regular  and 
genuine.  One  device  often  employed  consists  of  some 
kind  of  a  design  printed  on  the  surface  of  the  paper. 
Some  of  these  are  simply  parallel,  straight  or  curved 
lines,  while  others  are  elaborate  designs,  or  the  words 
making  up  the  name  of  the  bank,  printed  small  and  close 
together  so  as  nearly  to  cover  the  whole  surface  of  the 
paper  and  give  a  tint  to  it.  These  designs  or  lines  are 
supposed  to  be  printed  in  an  ink  that  is  removed  by  any 
chemical  agent  that  will  remove  writing  ink  and  with 
the  thought  that  such  an  erasure  would  thus  become 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  411 

perfectly  apparent  by  also  taking  away  the  lines.  This 
would  be  the  result  if  the  ink  is  removed  by  clumsily 
smearing  the  chemicals  over  the  whole  field  of  the  writ- 
ing, as  an  office  boy  might  do  it,  but  when  only  the  lines 
themselves  are  taken  out  only  a  small  portion  of  the 
design  is  removed,  which  is  easily  restored,  and,  when 
overwritten  with  the  new  or  added  words,  the  change 
can  hardly  be  discovered  and  the  printed  tint  actually 
assists  in  hiding  the  changes1. 

Another  device  which  has  been  widely  used  is  the 
check  punch  by  the  use  of  which  the  amount  in  figures 
is  punched  out  of  the  paper  either  by  small  perforations 
arranged  in  the  shape  of  figures,  or  the  complete  figure 
is  cut  out.  Although  this  method  has  been  very  popular 
it  is  not  only  ineffective  but  also  actually  aids  a  forger 
through  enabling  him  to  give  an  added  air  of  genuine- 
ness to  a  fraudulent  document  (see  Fig.  8)  after  filling 
in  the  genuine  amount  punched  out  which,  by  using  a 
similar  machine,  is  a  very  easy  and  simple  operation. 

Another  almost  universal  practice  in  this  country  that 
greatly  assists  the  forger  is  the  printing  of  the  word 
"Dollars"  at  the  extreme  right  hand  side  of  the  blank 
form,  leaving  a  long  space  usually  covered  only  by  a 
single  ink  line.  This  open  space  is  an  invitation  to  add 


older  methods  of  preventing  counterfeits  by  the  properties  of 
the  paper  itself  are  the  use  of  a  special  watermark  and  the  Willcox 
process  of  applying  colored  fibres  on  the  surface.  Forgeries  are 
guarded  against  by  Ballande's  method  using  a  paper  containing  calo- 
mel on  which  the  authentic  writing  is  done  with  a  solution  of  alum 
and  sodium  hyposulphite;  Zeiss's  method  consisting  in  printing  the 
paper  with  three  colors,  one  visible  and  fast,  another  over  this  one 
which  is  visible  and  easily  removed,  and  a  third  invisible  but  darkened 
by  writing  materials,  and  Haskins  and  Wells's  method  using  a  paper 
containing  5%  phosphate  of  iron,  2%  phosphate  of  manganese,  and  5% 
potassium  ferro-cyanide,  which  is  stained  by  acids,  alkalies  or  salts.  — 
Berlin  Centralblatt,  through  Paper  Making,  26,  541-3,  Dec.,  1907,  and 
Chemical  Abstracts,  Vol.  2,  No.  4,  p.  586,  Feb.  20,  1908. 


412  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

"hundred"  or  "thousand"  to  a  small  amount  or  to  make 
any  change  desired  after  the  necessary  erasure  with 
chemicals. 

Some  business  forms  have  a  protective  stub  which  is 
torn  off  to  the  proper  line,  but  with  these  after  being 
"raised"  the  whole  stub  is  torn  off;  others  have  separate 
printed  forms  for  different  amounts  and  this  is  no  doubt 
the  most  effective  protection,  but  the  method  is  not 
practical.  Still  other  forms  are  printed  on  a  paper 
which  is  supposed  to  be  discolored  by  chemical  applica- 
tions, others  are  written  with  "safety  ink,"  which  is 
usually  India  ink  or  ink  made  of  carbon  which  can  not 
be  removed  by  chemicals  but,  under  some  conditions,  can 
be  removed  by  mechanical  means  as  it  is  not  absorbed 
in  the  paper.  There  is  also  in  use  a  machine  that  em- 
bosses and  prints  across  the  face  of  a  check  or  draft 
"Not  over  One  Hundred  Dollars,"  or  a  similar  line, 
which,  while  the  machine  is  in  good  order,  is  an  effective 
protection.  Representatives  of  competing  machines  are, 
however,  showing  how  it  is  possible  to  make  a  fraudulent 
change  of  amount  when  a  machine  has  been  in  use  for  a 
long  time  and  the  ink  has  become  nearly  dried  up.  These 
machines  should  be  in  good  condition  in  order  fully  to 
serve  the  purpose  for  which  they  are  designed. 

The  question  of  raised  checks  and  drafts  is  a  very 
practical  one  to  the  banker.  As  a  rule  he  loses  what  he 
pays  on  such  documents  and  must  constantly  be  on 
guard.  The  method  and  procedure  that  he  should  em- 
ploy in  order  to  avoid  the  paying  of  raised  papers  are, 
as  far  as  the  conditions  will  allow,  those  that  should  be 
employed  in  an  exhaustive  examination  of  such  sus- 
pected documents. 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  413 

A  few  quick  tests  that  can  be  applied  to  suspected 
papers  of  this  kind  are :  ( 1 )  an  examination  of  the  whole 
paper  surface  by  reflected  light,  (2)  comparison  of  the 
line  quality  of  the  several  parts  of  the  amount  in  words 
and  comparison  of  the  line  quality  of  name  of  payee  and 
words  of  amount  line,  (3)  examination  of  the  number 
on  the  document  in  order  to  discover  if  it  is  made  with 
rubber  stamp  or  shows  any  irregularity,  ( 4 )  comparison 
of  exact  tint  and  quality  of  ink  in  amount  line  with  other 
parts,  (5)  comparison  of  width  of  pen  lines  or  pen 
strokes  of  the  various  parts  and  search  for  an}^  irregu- 
larities due  to  differences  in  sizing  or  surface  of  the 
paper  on  different  parts  of  document,  (6)  search  for 
discolorations  due  to  chemical  erasures,  (7)  examination 
of  back  of  document  in  field  where  suspected  writing 
appears  for  evidence  of  embossing  or  erasures,  (8) 
examination  of  style,  slant,  size  and  speed  of  writing 
of  amount  in  words  and  figures  compared  with  writing 
on  other  parts  of  document,  (9)  careful  examination  of 
amount  in  figures  for  evidences  of  lack  of  uniformity, 
(10)  examination  for  odor  of  ink  eradicator,  (11) 
observation  of  amount  line  and  amount  in  figures  by 
transmitted  light  with  sun  shining  directly  on  the  docu- 
ment. The  final  step  to  be  taken  in  some  cases,  and  the 
best  of  all,  is  to  call  by  long  distance  telephone  the 
parties  who  drew  the  paper. 

The  banker  labors  under  several  difficulties.  He 
usually  is  hurried  when  forged  paper  is  presented  and 
must  make  a  quick  decision,  knowing  that  unwarranted 
suspicion  of  a  document  may  never  be  forgotten  and 
may  lose  a  good  patron,  and  also  fully  realizing  all  the 
time  that  he  may  pay  out  good  money  on  a  fraudulent 


414  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

paper.  If  a  paper  is  suspected  some  excuse  for  delay 
must  be  made  until  it  can  be  properly  examined.  Most 
raised  papers  are  handled  or,  in  the  forger's  vernacular, 
"laid  down"  by  a  comparatively  new  depositor  who  has 
previously  opened  an  account  and  made  deposits  and 
drawn  checks  until  he  has  become  known,  so  that  when 
the  time  arrives  for  him  to  present  his  fraudulent  paper 
he  needs  no  identification.  These  facts  would  seem  to 
suggest  the  importance  of  investigating  all  new 
customers1. 

It  is  not  generally  known  what  an  enormous  amount 
is  lost  every  year  on  forged  and  "raised"  documents. 
Bankers  and  business  men  do  not  even  tell  each  other 
and  often  a  clever  swindler  actually  leaves  a  trail  of 
fraudulent  paper  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific.  Not 
banks  alone  but  hotels  and  many  business  houses  of  all 
kinds  are  thus  constantly  victimized.  If  there  is  no  clew 
the  victim  quietly  charges  the  amount  to  his  loss  account 
as  part  of  the  cost  of  experience  and  does  not  advertise 
the  fact  that  he  has  been  swindled. 

A  central  clearing  house  for  forged  paper,  properly 

aCertain  practices  can  hardly  be  too  strongly  condemned.  One  of 
these  is  paying-  money  to  unidentified  strangers  on  "O.  K.d"  endorse- 
ments. In  such  a  transaction  reliance  is  solely  on  the  handwriting  and 
if  a  forger  is  skillful  enough  to  forge  the  name  on  the  face  of  the  docu- 
ment he  can  put  the  same  name  on  the  back.  Another  dangerous 
practice  is  the  sending  out  of  money  on  written  orders  where  hand- 
writing alone  must  again  be  depended  upon.  Under  the  present  prac- 
tice of  keeping  only  one  signature,  and  often  a  very  poor  signature, 
for  handwriting  comparison  it  is  dangerous  to  depend  exclusively  upon 
such  comparison. 

On  the  third  of  July,  1909,  two  forged  "O.  K.'d"  checks  for  $2600 
were  paid  by  a  Rochester  bank  on  the  same  day,  and  on  the  eighteenth 
of  December  of  the  same  year,  five  forged  "O.  K.'d"  checks,  aggregat- 
ing $7840,  were  paid  by  five  different  banks  of  the  city  of  New  Orleans. 

Another  objectionable  practice  that  may  open  the  door  to  fraud  is 
the  selling  of  New  York  exchange  to  strangers. 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  415 

conducted  by  one  skilled  in  classifying  and  identifying 
disputed  documents  and  especially  handwriting,  would 
save  banks  and  hotels  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars 
every  year.  It  is  said  that  every  such  forger  is  convicted 
sooner  or  later,  and  this  is  no  doubt  true  as  forgery  in 
so  many  cases  seems  to  be  an  unconquerable  habit,  but 
in  the  meantime  the  losses  amount  to  an  enormous  sum, 
It  is  positively  known  that  clever  swindlers  of  this  class 
have  operated  for  more  than  ten  years  before  they  were 
finally  caught1. 

No  devices  or  methods  of  procedure  would  be  an  un- 
failing protection  against  fraud,  but  open  tempta- 
tion could  be  partially  removed  and  many  losses  pre- 
vented if  all  checks,  drafts  and  orders  for  money,  and 
especially  bank  drafts,  were  printed  and  drawn  in  such 
manner  as  to  make  changes  difficult  instead  of  easy  as 
now  is  often  the  case. 


forgers  who  make  a  practice  of  defrauding  the  banks  of  the 
smaller  cities,  first  establish  confidence  with  the  officials  of  the  institu- 
tion they  intend  to  plunder.  This  is  done  in  a  very  simple  manner, 
but  one  that  generally  proves  successful.  Several  weeks  before  the 
forgery  is  attempted  the  advance  agent  of  the  gang  hires  and  opens 
an  insurance  or  real  estate  office  in  the  vicinity  of  the  bank.  At  the 
latter  place  he  makes  a  number  of  bona  fide  deposits  and  has  some 
business  transactions,  which  are  simply  the  transfer  of  money  from 
one  city  to  another.  Then  when  he  is  beyond  suspicion  he  lays  down 
for  collection  a  draft  for  a  large  sum,  which  bears  the  forged  signature 
of  a  genuine  depositor  at  a  bank  in  a  distant  city.  Upon  the  presenta- 
tion of  the  paper  the  officials  telegraph  to  the  bank  it  is  drawn  upon, 
inquiring  if  the  person  or  firm  whose  forged  signature  it  bears  is  a 
depositor  in  good  standing  there.  The  answer  being  satisfactory,  at 
least  three-fourths  of  the  amount  called  for  by  the  check  is  willingly 
advanced  by  the  bank  of  deposit,  to  the  forger's  trusted  agent.  In 
due  time  the  counterfeit  is  forwarded  for  collection  through  the 
regular  business  channels,  and  when  it  finally  reaches  its  destination 
its  character  is  discovered.  The  insurance  or  real  estate  office  has  in 
the  meantime  collapsed,  and  the  forger  and  his  tools  have  vanished. 
A  smart  gang,  with  a  dozen  or  more  advance  agents,  have  been  known 
to  dupe  in  a  single  year  over  forty  banks  throughout  the  country, 
netting,  with  a  small  outlay,  about  $160,000  by  their  operations. — 
Professional  Criminals  of  America,  by  Thomas  Byrnes,  late  Chief  of 
Police,  New  York  City,  second  edition,  p.  18. 


416  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIG.  171  — The  Amount  Lines  of  Five  "Raised"  papers1. 

All  such  business  forms  that  pass  from  hand  to  hand 
should  be  printed  on  dry,  very  smooth  and  perfectly 
white  calendered  paper,  not  of  the  very  highest  quality > 
with  an  ample  field  of  pure  white  paper  surface  above 
and  below  the  amount  line.  The  word  Dollars  should 
not  be  printed  in  drafts  and  important  papers  but  should 
be  written  immediately  after  the  amount  in  words,  and 
the  amount  in  figures  with  the  dollar  sign  should  follow 
close  upon  the  same  line.  This  writing  of  the  line  con- 


first  draft  illustrated  was  drawn  on  The  State  Bank  of  Chicago, 
Jan.  29,  1909.  It  was  certified,  then  raised  to  twenty-seven  thousand 
dollars  and  deposited  in  the  Illinois  Trust  and  Savings  Bank  and 
$17,000  drawn  against  it. 

The  second  illustration  is  from  a  Bank  of  Woodland,  Woodland, 
Cal.,  draft  drawn  for  twelve  dollars  raised  to  twenty-two  thousand  and 
cashed  in  gold  at  the  Nevada  Bank,  San  Francisco.  Charles  Becker, 
the  celebrated  forger,  was  finally  convicted  of  forging  this  paper. 

The  third  raised  paper  was  drawn  by  The  Philadelphia  National 
Bank  for  seventy-six  dollars,  raised  to  seventy-six  hundred  and  paid 
in  New  York. 

The  fourth  raised  paper  is  from  a  note  raised  from  two  hundred  to 
two  thousand  dollars.  After  being  photographed  in  enlarged  form  it 
was  not  presented  for  payment. 

The  fifth  specimen  is  from  a  draft  by  the  German  American  Bank, 
Sidney,  Ohio,  raised  from  ten  to  ten  thousand  dollars  and  negotiated 
in  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS  417 

taining  the  amount  in  words,  the  word  Dollars,  and  the 
amount  in  figures  should  be  begun  at  the  extreme  left 
of  the  paper  and  should  be  written  continuously  with 
the  parts  close  together  until  all  are  written.  Any  pro- 
tective embossing  should  follow  immediately  upon  the 
same  line  in  the  writing  space  if  there  is  room,  or  across- 
the  line  of  writing  if  there  is  not  room  for  it  in  the  blank 
space.  To  raise  such  a  paper  from  a  small  to  a  large 
amount  would  necessitate  the  erasure  of  at  least  part  of 
the  line  of  writing  including  the  word  dollars  and  the 
amount  in  figures,  instead  of  removing  a  single  wavy 
or  straight  line  between  the  amount  in  words  and  the 
printed  word  "Dollars"  at  the  extreme  end  of  the  line. 
It  is  not  often  that  a  fraudulent  paper  is  first  pre- 
sented to  the  bank  upon  which  it  is  drawn  and  these 
extra  precautions  are  really  for  the  protection  of  others. 
It  is  objectionable  and  unpleasant  to  put  into  the  hands 
of  every  innocent  customer  a  paper  all  plastered  over 
with  perfectly  evident  precautions  against  forgers  and 
for  this  reason  many  effectual  methods  for  the  preven- 
tion of  check  raising  cannot  be  employed.  Some  of  the 
devices  in  use  convey  disagreeable  suggestions  and  even 
if  effective  would  not  be  universally  adopted.  Banks 
and  business  men,  however,  are  quick  to  make  any 
change  for  the  common  good  and  a  few  by  careless 
practices  should  not  continue  to  subject  others  to  con- 
stant danger  of  serious  loss1. 


valuable  suggestions  regarding  the  general  subject  discussed 
in  this  chapter  as  well  as  many  other  questions  relating  to  forgery 
and  questioned  documents  generally  may  be  found  in  "Der  Nachweis 
von  Schriftfalschungen  u.  s.  w.,"  by  Prof.  Dr.  M.  Dennstedt  and  Dr.  F. 
Voigtlander,  Fredrich  Vieweg  und  Sohn,  Braunschweig,  Germany, 
1906.  Dr.  Dennstedt  is  director  of  the  State  Chemical  Laboratory  at 
Hamburg. 


418 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Illustrations. 


The  facts  regarding  erasures  and  alterations  in  docu- 
ments can  usually  be  discovered  and  shown  if  suitable 
photographs  are  promptly  made.  Mere  enlargements 
on  a  small  scale  or  on  a  large  scale  by  the  bromide  process 
from  a  small  negative  may  show  nothing  if  the  work  is 
not  done  with  an  intelligent  understanding  of  the  prob- 
lem. An  examination  of  some  of  the  accompanying 
illustrations  in  half-tone  of  delicate  microscopic  facts 
shows  what  is  possible.  The  subject  must  be  studied 
from  the  standpoint  of  lighting,  color  and  degree  of 
enlargement  and  in  some  cases  it  is  possible,  only  by 
actual  experiment  to  determine  what  is  best.  Whatever 
is  done  should  be  done  promptly. 


FIG.  172 — Pencil  erasure  photographed   by   strong   side 

light  showing  by  shadow  in  indentation 

the  erased  figure  "3." 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS 


419 


FIG.  173— A  Bank  Draft  raised  from  $51  to  $9,000 ;  and  one  that  a  gang  of  forgers 
in  the  same  case  attempted  to  raise  but  did  not  do  a  good  job  the  first  time  and  then 
had  the  assurance  to  burn  away  a  portion  and  "take  the  paper  back  where  it  was 
bought  and  have  it  redeemed."  The  upper  check,  raised  from  $34  to  $9,000,  was 
the  one  on  which  Alonzo  J.  Whiteman,  the  celebrated  forger,  was  convicted.  It 
was  deposited  and  drawn  against  in  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 


Fig.  174 — The  amount  "  11"  changed  to  "  17"  by  addition  to  top  of  figure  "1"  in  a 
series  of  "raised"  notes.    This  exhibit  is  from  case  illustrated  in  Fig.  29. 


420 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


FIGS.  175,  176 — Abrasion  erasure  in  a  will  in  which  the  shape  of  the  erasure,  as 
illustrated  by  a  transmitted  light  photograph,  showed  that  the  erasure  fitted  the 
words  which  it  was  claimed  the  will  contained  when  it  was  executed.  Fig.  175 
shows  the  full  width  of  the  page  in  reduced  size  showing  the  transmitted  light 
photograph  and  below  the  same  photograph  with  the  words  written  in  that  it  was 
alleged  the  will  originally  contained.  Fig.  176  is  an  enlarged  portion  made  with 
more  contrast  to  show  more  clearly  the  shape  of  the  erasure  which  it  will  be  seen 
exactly  matches  the  name  of  H.  *T.  Scott.  The  photographs  were  made  by  Mr. 
J.  F.  Shearman,  handwriting  examiner  and  photographer,  Wichita,  Kansas. 


ERASURES  AND  ALTERATIONS 


421 


n 

l-a 

111 


s| 

"oa  "" 


C    C 

I  S 


8^5 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

QUESTIONED  ADDITIONS  AND  INTERLINEATIONS 

The  validity  of  a  document  is  sometimes  questioned 
because  it  contains  parts  in  the  form  of  interlineations 
or  additions  which  may  greatly  change,  extend,  or  limit 
its  effect  and  value.  In  such  a  case  the  question  to  be 
determined  is  whether  the  document  was  continuously 
written  and  completed  before  execution,  or  whether  the 
addition  or  interlineation  is  a  fraudulent  writing  which 
the  document  did  not  contain  when  it  was  signed.  Such 
questions  are  the  basis  of  much  litigation. 

Changes  or  interlineations  in  a  will  should  be  described 
at  the  end  of  the  will  itself  before  execution,  but  this 
commendable  practice  is  by  no  means  universal  and  it 
frequently  becomes  necessary  to  determine  whether 
interlined  or  added  parts  are  genuine  or  fraudulent. 
Numerous  careless  practices  in  the  drawing  of  wills  are 
an  open  temptation  to  fraud.  Many  important  wills 
not  only  contain  erasures,  additions  and  interlineations 
but  are  written  on  two  or  more  sheets  of  paper  loosely 
fastened  together,  and  in  one  important  case  the  attesta- 
tion clause  and  the  signatures  of  the  witnesses  were 
on  a  separate  sheet  from  the  will  itself  bearing  the 
signature  of  the  testator.  These  practices  make  it  easy 
to  make  a  fraudulent  addition  or  interlineation  or  even 
to  substitute  whole  pages. 

If  it  is  possible  that  the  interlined  or  added  part  may 
be  in  a  different  handwriting  then  careful  study  and 

[422] 


ADDITIONS  AND   INTERLINEATIONS  423 

comparison  must  be  made  as  with  a  simulated  forgery, 
but  often  the  part  in  dispute  is  concededly  written  by 
the  writer  of  the  remainder  of  the  document,  and  the 
order,  date  and  continuity  of  the  writing  are  the  ques- 
tions to  be  investigated. 

If  an  interlined  part  immediately  precedes  the  signa- 
ture, as  is  often  the  case,  careful  examination  should  be 
made  to  see  if  any  parts  of  this  writing  cross  or  touch 
any  stroke  of  the  writing  of  the  signature  itself.  If 
there  are  such  crossed  lines  they  must  be  examined  with 
great  care  and  thoroughness  as  outlined  in  a  preceding 
chapter.  It  is  not  easily  understood  without  actual 
experiment  and  examination  with  what  clearness  and 
certainty  (see  Fig.  29)  it  can  often  be  shown  which 
was  the  last  stroke  made  in  such  a  case.  Crossed  lines 
may  also  point  to  unnatural  order  of  writing  of  other 
parts  of  the  document  and  it  should  be  carefully  ex- 
amined throughout  with  this  point  in  mind. 

The  question  whether  any  part  of  the  writing  followed 
the  folding  of  the  paper  should  also  be  carefully  con- 
sidered if  that  fact  has  any  bearing  on  the  genuineness 
of  the  document  or  shows  anything  irregular  in  its 
preparation.  This  question  is  often  of  great  importance 
and  such  points  may  be  entirely  overlooked  if  a  docu- 
ment is  not  systematically  examined  in  every  particular. 

If  it  is  claimed  or  must  be  maintained  that  the  writing 
in  question  or  any  suspected  part  was  written  at  the 
same  sitting  as  the  remainder  of  the  document  and  with 
the  same  pen  and  ink,  then  the  class,  condition,  tint  and 
shade  of  the  ink  must  be  carefully  examined  throughout 
the  whole  document.  The  portion  in  dispute  and  those 
preceding  and  following  it  should  be  photographed  in 


424  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

several  ways,  as  directed  in  the  ink  and  photography 
chapters,  to  discover  possible  differences  in  tint.  As  it 
is  difficult  if  not  impossible  to  distinguish  tints  by 
artificial  light,  unless  the  differences  are  very  pro- 
nounced, the  ink  lines  should  be  examined  in  daylight 
with  the  color  microscope  and  magnified  to  an  extent 
which  best  shows  the  exact  tint  and  shade.  Somewhat 
distinct  differences  in  shade  or  tint  are  not  discernible 
except  under  proper  magnification,  and  then  the  condi- 
tions and  light  must  also  be  favorable. 

If  a  color  microscope  is  not  available,  then  two  ink 
lines  of  equal  strength  should  if  possible  be  found  lying 
close  together,  one  disputed,  one  undisputed,  which  can 
both  be  brought  for  comparison  at  one  time  into  the 
field  of  the  ordinary  compound  microscope.  Hand 
magnifiers  are  not  always  corrected  for  color  aberrations 
and  must  not  be  relied  upon  exclusively  in  determining 
tints. 

The  ink  in  such  a  questioned  writing  should  always 
be  chemically  tested  by  the  application  of  suitable  re- 
agents to  determine  whether  it  shows  the  same  color 
reactions  as  the  ink  in  other  parts  of  the  document.  If 
inks  of  different  chemical  constituents  have  been  used, 
although  their  color  as  shown  in  the  writing  be  the  same, 
such  chemical  tests  properly  and  carefully  made,  as  out- 
lined in  the  chapter  treating  the  question  of  ink,  will 
show  conclusively  that  they  are  different. 

If  it  is  claimed  that  the  writing  was  with  the  same  pen 
then  a  number  of  the  unshaded  and  shaded  strokes  of 
the  questioned  writing  should  be  carefully  measured  and 
averaged  for  comparison  with  similar  measurements  of 
other  parts  of  the  document.  A  microscope  with  filar- 


ADDITIONS  AND   INTERLINEATIONS  425 

micrometer  attachment  (see  Figs.  35,  49)  is  necessary 
for  this  work.  Line  widths,  which  in  unshaded  strokes 
range  in  extremes  from  about  one-thirtieth  up  to  one 
two-hundredth  of  an  inch,  can  easily  be  measured.  With 
this  instrument  measurements  in  divisions  of  twenty 
thousandths  of  an  inch  can  readily  be  made,  and  this 
high  division  renders  it  possible  to  compare  with  extreme 
accuracy  the  average  widths  of  the  normal,  minimum, 
and  shaded  strokes  in  the  regular  writing  and  in  the 
questioned  interlined  or  added  writing.  The  upward 
normal  strokes  show  approximately  the  width  of  the  pen 
point,  and,  if  measured  in  both  writings  and  compared 
(see  Figs.  36,  75,  78) ,  any  difference  can  be  conclusively 
shown. 

The  difference  in  width  of  lines  made  with  fine  pens 
actually  varying  as  much  as  fifty  per  cent.,  is  not  plainly 
apparent  until  the  lines  are  measured.  The  microscope 
attachment  referred  to  is  indispensable  for  such  exam- 
inations as  it  enables  even  those  without  experience  in 
such  matters  to  read  and  verify  these  measuremnts. 
Differences  in  line  width  in  such  parts  may  be  apparent 
to  the  unaided  eye  and  in  this  case  definite  measure- 
ments confirm  and  enforce  the  conclusion. 

The  question  is  sometimes  presented  as  to  whether 
several  book  entries,  charges,  credits  or  debits,  were  made 
in  the  regular  course  of  business  on  the  dates  they  bear 
or  were  fraudulently  made  at  one  time  at  some  later 
period  to  show  some  desired  result.  In  such  a  case  it 
is  highly  probable  that  there  will  be  greater  uniformity 
in  the  fraudulent  additions  than  in  the  regular  writing. 

This  unnatural  uniformity  may  show,  (1)  in  the  tint 
or  condition  of  the  ink,  (2)  in  the  quality  of  line,  (3)  its 


426  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

width,  (4)  its  smoothness  or  roughness,  (5)  in  the  size 
of  the  writing,  (6)  in  its  position,  especially  its  vertical 
alignment,  or  (7)  in  the  size,  position  and  arrangement 
of  figures,  ditto  marks  or  abbreviations.  Such  continu- 
ous writings,  whether  with  pencil  or  pen,  will  almost 
certainly  show  less  variation  in  numerous  ways  than  if 
written  at  different  times,  with  the  writing  instrument 
in  various  conditions  and  the  writer  necessarily  sur- 
rounded by  differing  circumstances  of  time,  position, 
light,  haste  and  care,  which  variable  conditions  inevitably 
affect  the  result.  Some  of  these  habits  of  uniformity 
differ  in  different  individuals  and  the  basis  of  com- 
parison in  such  an  inquiry  should,  if  obtainable,  be  other 
similar  work  by  the  same  writer. 

If  the  task  of  the  forger  is  to  add  a  considerable 
amount  of  writing  to  a  document  and  thus  change  its 
significance  the  task  is,  as  a  natural  consequence,  vastly 
more  difficult  than  simply  to  write  a  signature  under 
such  conditions.  Even  with  the  same  materials  and 
under  the  same  external  conditions,  it  is  exceedingly 
difficult  to  produce  such  an  addition  without  making 
some  conspicuous  differences,  which,  when  pointed  out 
and  property  interpreted,  are  perfectly  apparent.  This 
difference  can  usually  be  shown  even  if  it  has  been 
possible  to  match  the  exact  tint  of  ink,  quality  of  line 
and  width  of  strokes,  which,  after  the  lapse  of  even  a 
little  time,  is  exceedingly  difficult  if  not  actually  im- 
possible. 

Another  interesting  kind  of  forgery  by  addition  of  a 
fraudulent  part  is  that  in  which  a  document  is  written 
over  a  genuine  signature.  Old  documents  containing 
genuine  signatures  in  which  a  blank  space  was  carelessly 


ADDITIONS  AND   INTERLINEATIONS 


427 


left  above  the  signature  are  sometimes  used  to  make 
fraudulent  notes,  agreements  or  contracts,  all  the  docu- 
ment being  cut  away  but  the  signature  and  the  blank 
paper  above  it  upon  which  the  subject  matter  is  written. 
Such  fraudulent  documents  have  been  written  over 
signatures  carelessly  written  on  blank  paper,  or  fraudu- 
lently obtained,  and,  at  least  in  one  instance,  illustrated 
herewith,  a  document  was  made  out  of  a  page  of  an  old 


FIG.  178 — A  disputed  note  in  a  New  Hampshire  case  written  above  a  signature  in 
an  old  style  autograph  album.    The  sheet  had  a  "silvered"  edge  and  the 
one  round  corner  and  the  mark  of  the  binding  at  the  left  and 
a  part  of  what  was  the  original  date  line  at  the  bot- 
tom can  be  seen  even  on  the  half-tone  cut. 

style  autograph  album,  a  note  for  a  large  amount  having 
been  written  above  the  genuine  signature. 

If  it  is  claimed,  as  is  usually  the  case,  that  both  the 
signature  and  the  body  of  a  suspected  document  of  this 
class  were  written  at  the  same  time  and  place,  the  ink 
of  the  two  parts  should  be  carefully  tested  in  every  way 
possible  as  with  a  disputed  interlineation.  If  the  writing 


428  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

of  the  body  of  the  document  and  the  signature  touch  at 
any  point  this  may  show,  by  examination  of  the  crossed 
strokes,  that  the  signature  was  undoubtedly  written  first. 

The  writing  of  both  the  signature  and  the  subject- 
matter  over  any  continuous  folds  in  the  paper  should  be 
examined  for  the  purpose  of  determining,  if  possible, 
the  order  of  the  writing  and  the  folding.  If  the  signa- 
ture extends  across  a  well  defined  fold  over  which  the 
writing  of  the  subject-matter  also  extends  and  it  can 
be  clearly  shown  that  the  signature  wras  written  before 
the  folding  and  the  writing  above  the  signature  after  the 
folding  (see  Fig.  28)  then  these  facts  alone  would  show 
that  the  document  is  not  genuine. 

A  third  indication  of  a  lack  of  genuineness  in  such  a 
document  is  a  crowded  or  unnatural  arrangement  of  the 
words  written  in  before  the  genuine  signature.  This, 
crowding  in  of  writing  immediately  above  the  signa- 
ture may  be  shown  by  comparison  with  the  other  parts 
of  the  document,  or  the  curving  of  the  last  line  of  writing 
up  above  the  signature  may  show  that  the  signature 
must  have  been  there  first,  or  the  line  would  not  have 
been  written  so  as  to  avoid  it. 

In  some  instances  the  fraudulent  writing  is  begun  too 
high  and  the  last  lines  are  written  with  the  words  wide 
apart  and  arranged  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  the  attempt 
to  fill  up  the  open  space  above  the  signature.  The 
signature  may  be  too  far  to  the  left  to  be  in  a  natural 
position  or,  in  some  instances,  it  may  be  too  far  away 
from  the  body  of  the  document  to  look  natural  and  as 
if  written  in  the  usual  manner  after  the  writing  it 
follows.  The  lower  parts  of  long  letters  in  the  writing 
over  the  signature  may  be  abbreviated  in  an  unnatural 


ADDITIONS  AND   INTERLINEATIONS 


429 


manner  to  avoid  running  into  or  touching  the  signature, 
or  such  letters  may  be  bent  to  the  right  or  left  for  the 
same  reason. 

The  paper  on  which  such  a  suspected  document  is 
written  should,  if  possible,  be  followed  to  its  source.  It 
may  be  possible  to  show  that  the  paper  is  actually  a  part 
of  a  legal  blank  or  document  used  for  another  purpose 
and  its  foldings  or  worn  portions  or  discolorations  may 
point  to  its  former  use.  The  edges  of  the  paper  should 
be  carefully  examined  to  see  if  it  was  cut  by  hand 
and  to  determine  what  part  of  the  sheet  it  came  from, 
and  both  sides  of  the  paper  should  be  carefully  examined 
for  evidences  of  unequal  soiling  or  discoloration  due  to 


FIG.  181— Exhibit  from  Matter  of  Kirkholder  estate  tried  in  Buffalo,  N.  Y., 
1908,  photographed  by  Mr.  William  J.  Kinsley,  Examiner  and  Photographer  of 
Questioned  Documents,  New  York.  It  was  proved  that  the  writing  of  the  body  of 
a  will  was  written  over  what  purported  to  be  a  will  signature.  The  alleged  signa- 
ture was  preceded  by  the  abbreviation  "Mr."  and  the  word  "attestting"  was  written 
over  the  capital  "M." 


430 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


its  position  as  part  of  a  previous  larger  sheet  used  for 
some  other  purpose. 

It  is  also  possible  that  a  genuine  signature  over  which 
a  fraudulent  document  is  written  may  be  so  old  that,  like 
the  selected  model  in  a  traced  forgery,  it  may  show  a 
change  in  handwriting  inconsistent  with  the  date  of  the 
document.  This  is  especially  true  if  the  writing  is  by 
one  well  advanced  in  years  whose  condition  of  health 
may  have  greatly  changed  between  the  actual  date  of 
the  writing  of  the  signature  and  the  date  of  the  fraudu- 
lent paper. 


FIG.  181-a — An  illustration  made  to  show  change  by  erasure  and  ad- 
dition of  stroke.     Transmitted  light  photograph  showing 
erasure  of  top  of  "3"  and  "crossed"  line  over  "4." 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

AGE  OF  DOCUMENTS 

The  question  of  age  has  been  discussed  incidentally 
in  several  preceding  chapters  but  the  subject  is  here 
somewhat  more  fully  treated  and  some  of  the  matters 
previously  referred  to  are  briefly  reviewed. 

No  matter  how  suspicious  the  circumstances  surround- 
ing a  fraudulent  document,  or  how  incredible  the  story 
of  how  it  was  found,  or  how  generally  improbable  the 
alleged  act  may  be,  it  usually  becomes  necessary  first  or 
last  to  prove  the  fraud,  if  it  is  to  be  proved  at  all,  from 
the  document  itself.  One  of  the  first  of  the  questions 
that  naturally  arise  in  such  an  inquiry  is  whether  it  is 
possible  to  show  that  a  fraudulent  document  is  not  as  old 
as  it  purports  to  be.  This  cannot  always  be  done,  but  the 
question  should  always  be  investigated  in  a  thorough, 
systematic  manner. 

Questions  of  age  enter  into  the  study  of  disputed 
documents  in  many  ways.  The  most  common  inquiry 
is,  as  has  been  said,  whether  a  document  is  actually  as 
old  as  its  date  would  indicate,  but  it  is  also  sometimes 
very  important  to  show  the  probable  date  of  an  undated 
document.  Another  frequent  subject  of  investigation 
is  whether  several  documents,  or  several  writings  bearing 
different  dates,  are  not  actually  of  the  same  age,  having 
been  fraudulently  produced  all  at  one  time;  and  then 
occasionally  the  other  question  may  arise  as  to  whether 
a  document  is  not  older  than  it  purports  to  be. 

[431] 


432  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

In  bankruptcy  cases  and  settlements  of  estates  the 
important  question  may  arise  whether  certain  entries  or 
memoranda  in  books  of  account  were  actually  made  in 
due  course  of  business  on  the  dates  they  bear,  or  whether 
they  were  made  at  a  subsequent  period  for  the  fraudulent 
purpose  (see  Fig.  77)  of  showing  a  certain  result  at  the 
date  of  settlement. 

Letters  are  sometimes  produced  as  evidence  to  support 
other  claims  and  it  becomes  necessary  to  determine 
whether  they  were  written  at  the  time  alleged.  The 
attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  prove  the  date  of  an  un- 
dated letter  by  producing  the  postmarked  envelope  in 
which  it  is  said  the  letter  was  mailed.  As  briefly  described 
in  a  preceding  chapter,  a  postmark  often  makes  an  in- 
dented imprint  on  an  inclosed  letter  (see  Fig.  24)  and 
in  such  a  case  it  should  be  ascertained  whether  the  post- 
mark and  the  indentation  on  the  letter  match  each  other 
in  position,  intensity  and  size.  If  the  postmarking  was 
so  heavily  done  that  it  shows  through  on  the  back  of  the 
envelope  then  a  letter  which  is  said  to  have  been  inclosed 
in  it  must  necessarily  show  a  postmark  indentation. 

The  actual  age  of  a  document  is  ascertained  by  a  study 
of  all  the  means  by  which  it  was  produced,  and  all  the 
external  evidence  bearing  on  the  question  should  be  care- 
fully investigated.  The  phraseology  throughout  and  the 
subject  matter  of  the  document  should  be  examined  with 
reference  to  all  the  known  conditions  and  facts  that  may 
be  connected  in  any  way  with  the  case.  It  frequently 
happens  that  names  of  persons,  firms,  or  corporations, 
names  or  numbers  of  streets,  or  references  to  events  or 
transactions  in  a  questioned  document,  have  a  conclusive 
chronological  significance  and  prove  that  such  a  docu- 


AGE  OF  DOCUMENTS  433 

ment  was  made  before  or  after  a  certain  definite  date. 
Even  a  postage  stamp  may  have  a  most  important  date 
significance. 

The  age  of  a  typewritten  document  should  be  care- 
fully tested  by  a  study  of  that  subject  as  outlined  in  a 
subsequent  chapter.  More  and  more  this  subject  is 
coming  to  be  of  importance  as  bearing  on  the  date  of 
documents;  the  most  short-sighted  and  incriminating 
blunders  have  been  made  in  the  production  of  fraudulent 
typewritten  documents  under  the  common  delusion  that 
typewriting  cannot  be  identified. 

It  is  also  quite  possible  that  a  study  of  the  handwriting 
of  a  document  may  throw  some  light  on  the  question  of 
its  date.  If  the  handwriting  is  unknown  or  in  dispute, 
then  this  phase  of  the  subject  should,  of  course,  receive 
the  most  careful  attention.  Many  writers,  particularly 
those  who  write  well  and  freely,  are  from  time  to  time 
making  slight  but  persistent  changes  in  their  handwrit- 
ing. These  changes  are  usually  few  in  number  compared 
with  all  the  characteristics  of  the  writing  and  do  not 
change  the  general  style,  but  are  often  sufficient,  with 
adequate  material  for  comparison,  to  show  conclusively 
that  a  writing  was  made  before  or  after  a  certain  definite 
time.  An  interval  of  five  years  or  even  less,  under  certain 
health  conditions,  may  show  a  number  of  permanent 
and  significant  changes. 

Writers  differ  greatly  in  the  permanency  of  their 
writing  in  tkis  regard,  but  if  the  circumstances  permit 
it,  the  question  should  always  be  carefully  considered  in 
estimating  the  age  of  a  document.  Fraudulent  notes 
against  estates  for  thousands  of  dollars  have  been  manu- 
factured, purporting  to  be  many  years  old,  but  with 


434  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

forged  signatures  the  design  and  form  of  which  proved 
unmistakably  that  they  were  simulations  of  a  genuine 
signature  of  a  period  twenty  years  or  more  after  the 
alleged  date  of  the  notes. 

References  to  alleged  promises,  contracts  or  incidents 
are  sometimes  made  in  added  postscripts  to  old  letters. 
The  additions  may  have  been  made  by  the  writer  of  the 
original  letter  into  whose  hands  it  has  come.  Examina- 
tion of  such  a  writing  should  include  careful  attention 
to  the  writing  over  folded  portions  of  the  paper,  exact 
tint  of  ink,  width  of  pen  strokes,  style,  speed  and  care 
of  writing,  and  relevancy  of  the  matter  in  question. 

The  approximate  age  and  fraudulent  date  of  a  docu- 
ment can  often  be  shown  by  an  examination  of  the  paper 
on  which  it  is  written.  Many  wills  and  other  important 
documents  have  been  written  on  paper  which  it  has  been 
the  fraudulent  document.  In  the  chapter  on  paper  this 
the  fraudulent  document.  In  the  chapter  on  paper  this 
subject  is  more  fully  treated. 

In  many  instances  the  fluid  ink  on  a  document  pur- 
porting to  be  several  years  old  has  not  reached  its 
ultimate  intensity  of  color  and  changes  and  actually 
turns  black  after  the  document  is  brought  forward. 
This  is  a  matter  which  should,  of  course,  receive  the 
closest  scrutiny  at  the  earliest  possible  moment.  A  veri- 
fied and  dated  color  reading  of  the  ink  should  at  once 
be  made  with  the  color  microscope  in  order  that  it  may 
be  compared  with  a  similar  reading  at  a  later  time. 

Hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars  have  been  paid  for 
spurious  letters  and  writings  of  various  kinds  purport- 
ing to  have  been  written  by  famous  people.  The  most 
astonishing  credulity  is  shown  by  purchasers  of  docu- 


AGE  OF  DOCUMENTS  435 

ments  of  this  kind.  These  spurious  papers  are  cherished 
with  the  greatest  care,  apparently  with  no  suspicion  that 
they  were  manufactured  to  be  sold  like  certain  imitation 
antique  furniture.  To  be  above  suspicion,  ancient  docu- 
ments should  have  a  connected  and  authentic  history1. 
In  many  instances  the  most  superficial  tests  will  show 
that  such  alleged  ancient  documents  are  undoubtedly 
fraudulent. 

The  attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  make  fraudulent 
documents  look  old  by  soiling  and  discoloring  them  in 
various  ways,  and  a  bleaching  agent  may  be  applied  to 
the  writing  to  make  it  appear  to  have  faded.  Such  an 
artificial  document  will  almost  certainly  show  suspicious 
inconsistencies  and  should  be  compared  with  undoubtedly 
genuine  papers  of  the  date  it  bears.  Artificial  aging 
may  be  overdone,  and  a  paper  purporting  to  be  ten  or  a 
dozen  years  old  may  in  some  ways  have  the  appearance 
of  one  that  has  been  written  fifty  or  seventy-five  years. 

Writing  that  is  actually  old  has  certain  distinctive 
characteristics  that  are  not  easily  imitated.  Old  ink  lines 

xBut  the  collector  must  be  warned  to  be  constantly  on  his  guard 
against  forgeries.  There  are  great  quantities  of  spurious  specimens 
in  circulation.  The  French  (though  their  laws  are  severe  against  all 
frauds)  are  wonderfully  clever  in  manufacturing  autographs.  This 
probably  accounts  for  the  number,  of  interesting  French  documents 
of  the  great  characters  of  the  last  century,  from  Louis  XIV.  to  Napo- 
leon, always  on  sale  at  very  moderate  prices.  There  are  many  forgers, 
too,  in  our  own  country  as  clever  as  "Jim  the  Penman."  *  *  *  A 
very  little  study  of  the  subject,  however,  will  enable  the  amateur  to 
distinguish  spurious  writings  from  originals.  In  the  first  place  a  care- 
ful examination  will  immediately  afford  many  points  of  evidence  either 
for  or  against  the  genuineness  of  any  autograph.  There  is  something 
unmistakable  to  the  practiced  eye  in  the  real  article  which  rarely 
deceives  it.  If  the  paper  were  taken  out  of  a  book  some  faint  indica- 
tions of  this  would  probably  be  apparent — e.  g.,  the  impressions  of  the 
bindings  or  the  printed  letters,  etc.  And  if  a  genuine  letter  of  the 
supposed  writer  of  the  document  in  question  could  be  compared  with 
it,  all  doubt  would  be  removed  by  attention  to  the  feel  of  the  papers, 
watermarks,  etc. — Autograph  Collecting,  by  Henry  T.  Scott,  London, 
1894,  pp.  4,  5. 


436  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

have  a  peculiar  appearance  under  magnification;  they 
usually  have  lost  all  trace  of  actual  pen  furrows,  and 
the  ink  lines  are  cracked  and  broken  and  often  stand 
up  from  the  paper  in  a  peculiar  manner,  caused  no 
doubt  in  large  measure  by  changes  in  humidity  and  the 
swelling  and  shrinking  of  the  paper.  In  an  inquiry  of 
this  character  it  is  very  important  to  get  actual  old 
papers  for  purposes  of  comparison. 

As  has  been  said  before,  much  time  is  lost  in  all  kinds 
of  questioned  document  inquiries  by  not  at  once  seeking 
out  proper  standards  of  comparison.  This  should  be  done 
in  all  such  investigations  instead  of  spending  the  whole 
time  looking  only  at  the  questioned  paper.  A  proper 
standard  will  often  open  up  an  investigation  that  will 
lead  to  evidence  of  great  value.  Like  the  other  subjects 
previously  discussed,  investigation  of  this  matter  of  age 
of  a  document  should  be  taken  up  and  carried  through 
following  a  definite  routine  in  order  that  nothing  may 
be  overlooked. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

QUESTIONED  TYPEWRITING1 

There  is  an  increasing  use  of  the  typewriting  machine 
for  the  production  of  spurious  papers ;  this  is  due  to  the 
great  increase  in  use  of  the  typewriter  generally  and  to 
the  erroneous  idea  that  fraudulent  typewriting  cannot 
be  detected.  Whatever  the  cause  that  may  have  led  to 
it,  the  use  of  the  typewriter  for  the  production  of 
fraudulent  writings  of  all  classes  has  certainly  created 
an  urgent  necessity  for  means  that  will  lead  to  the 
identification  of  such  documents,  the  determination  of 
their  dates,  and  the  discovery  of  their  authors.  Many 
fraudulent  typewritten  papers  have  no  doubt  entirely 
escaped  attack  and  served  their  evil  purposes  because  it 
was  assumed  that  their  genuineness  could  not  be  im- 
peached. 

Confirmatory  typewritten  documents  of  various  kinds 
are  frequently  brought  forward  to  sustain  signature 
forgeries  and  other  fraudulent  claims  and  it  is  often 
a  matter  of  great  importance  to  learn  where  they  came 
from  and  when  they  were  written.  The  public  generally 


lrThe  principal  part  of  this  chapter  was  first  printed  in  the  "Albany 
Law  Journal,"  Volume  63,  Number  11,  and  was  afterwards  reprinted 
in  the  "Chicago  Legal  News,"  May,  1906,  and  in  the  "Typewriter  and 
Phonographic  World,"  of  November,  1906.  That  part  of  the  chapter 
referring  particularly  to  the  question  of  fraudulently  dated  typewritten 
documents,  was  first  printed  in  the  "Typewriter  and  Phonographic 
World"  of  April,  1907,  and  afterwards  reprinted  in  the  "American 
Lawyer,"  of  June,  1907.  In  Band  I,  Nr.  3,  of  "Archiv  fur  Gerichtliche 
Schriftuntersuchungen,"  Leipsig,  1909,  both  articles  were  printed  with 
illustrations. 

[437] 


438 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


and  many  lawyers  who  have  not  investigated  the  subject 
hold  the  opinion  that  the  typewriter  has  no  individuality. 
Fortunately  this  is  not  true,  and  the  typewriting  machine 
does  not  always  afford  an  effective  protection  to  the 
criminal.  On  the  contrary,  the  typewriting  of  a  fraudu- 
lent document  may  be  the  direct  means  by  which  it  is 
traced  to  its  source  and  shown  to  be  what  it  is.  This  is 
especially  true  of  typewritten  anonymous  letters  and 
fraudulent  typewritten  documents  containing  consider- 
able matter,  the  correct  identification  of  wrhich  has  here- 
tofore depended  entirely  upon  other  means. 

Without  careful  investigation  it  is  impossible  to  say 
what  can  be  determined  from  the  examination  of  any 
particular  piece  of  typewriting,  but  it  is  important  that 
those  whose  interests  are  attacked  by  such  documents 
should  know  that  typewriting  can  sometimes  be  positive- 
ly identified  as  being  the  work  of  a  certain  particular 
typewriting  machine,  and  the  date  of  a  typewriting  in 
many  cases  can  be  determined  with  certainty.  A  knowl- 
edge of  these  two  facts  by  those  who  try  cases  in  courts 
of  law  would  in  many  cases  lead  to  the  discovery  of  the 
truth  and  prevent  miscarriages  of  justice. 

The  importance  of  this  new  field  of  inquiry  is  becom- 
ing recognized  by  typewriting  men,  who  have  shown 
much  interest  in  these  investigations,  the  results  of  which 
are  here  reported,  and  have  rendered  valuable  assistance ; 
indeed,  without  their  co-operation,  the  work  could  not 
have  been  done1.  There  is  naturally  no  lack  of  interest 


'The  erroneous  idea  is  generally  accepted  by  the  public  as  a  fact 
that  the  typewriting-  machine  is  of  great  assistance  to  those  who  set 
about  the  manufacture  of  fraudulent  documents. 

Those  connected  with  the  typewriter  industry  should  endeavor  to 
correct  this  mistaken  notion.  The  typewriter  is  not  only  not  an  ally 


QUESTIONED  TYPEWRITING  439 

by  lawyers  having  actual  typewriting  questions  in  hand, 
or  by  lawyers'  clients  whose  property,  whose  character 
or  whose  liberty  has  been  assailed  by  fraudulent  type- 
written documents. 

Typewriting  questions  are  presented  in  a  great  variety 
of  ways.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  often  necessary  simply 
to  ascertain  the  date  of  such  a  writing.  It  may  also  be 
a  matter  of  great  importance  to  learn  whether  a  docu- 
ment was  all  written  at  one  time,  or  written  at  different 
times  on  the  same  machine  or  at  different  times  on 
different  machines.  The  inquiry  sometimes  arises  as  to 
whether  fraudulent  typewritten  pages  have  been  sub- 
stituted in  wills,  whether  paragraphs  or  interlineations 
have  been  added  to  old  letters  or  deeds  and  contracts  ^ 
after  execution,  or  whether  modifying  conditions  have 
been  added  to  receipts  and  similar  vouchers. 

Sometimes  the  question  is  simply  whether  a  document  I 
was  written  on  a  certain  kind  of  machine,  and  then  again 
whether  it  was  written  on  a  certain  particular  typewriter 
which  may  be  one  of  a  number  of  suspected  machines. 
Different  habits  of  touch,  spacing,  speed,  arrangement 
and  punctuation  may  also  tend  to  show  that  a  document 
was  not  all  written  by  one  operator  or  that  a  collection 
of  documents  was  produced  by  different  operators,  all 


of  the  forger,  but  may  be  made  the  direct  means  of  his  downfall  in 
many  cases  if  the  subject  is  properly  investigated. 

Any  one  knows  that  a  typewritten  document  dated  early  enough 
would  necessarily  be  fraudulent,  and  it  is  equally  true  that  a  document 
dated  long  after  typewriters  came  into  use  may  show  a  kind  and  style 
of  typewriting  that  could  not  have  been  produced  on  the  date  the 
written  instrument  bears.  Typewriter  men  should  counteract  this  mis- 
taken notion  that  they  are  putting  into  the  hands  of  the  evil-minded 
a  dangerous  tool.  The  interests  of  justice  would  be  promoted  if  there 
could  be  published  an  authoritative  chronologically  arranged  collection 
of  typewriting  specimens. — Typewriter  and  Phonographic  World,  Vol. 
XXIX.,  No.  4. 


440  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

of  which  facts  may  be  of  great  importance  as  bearing 
on  the  genuineness  of  a  document  in  question.  Even 
the  number  of  threads  to  the  inch  in  the  ribbon,  as  shown 
in  the  type  impression,  plainly  seen  and  accurately  meas- 
ured by  the  microscope  or  in  the  enlarged  photograph, 
may  show  that  a  typewritten  addition  or  interlineation 
is  fraudulent. 

Where  the  subject-matter  of  a  questioned  document  is 
typewritten  and  bears  a  date  long  previous  to  the  time 
when  it  was  actually  produced,  the  question  naturally 
arises  whether  an  examination  of  the  typewriting  may 
not  prove  that  it  could  not  possibly  have  been  written 
on  the  date  it  bears.  Fortunately  there  are  many  type- 
writing characteristics  that  have  a  definite  date  signifi- 
cance, and  this  question  of  the  age  or  date  of  typewriting 
is  here  first  considered. 

A  fraudulent  document  is  usually  dated  back  to  some 
selected  time  when  certain  circumstances  or  occurrences 
tend  to  confirm  the  fraud.  Such  documents  may  actual- 
ly bear  a  date  twenty  years  before  the  time  when  they 
were  actually  written,  and  if  it  can  be  shown  that  such  a 
paper  could  not  have  been  written  on  the  date  it  bears, 
the  forgery  is  proved.  Those  whose  interests  lead  them 
to  investigate  the  subject  should  not  be  discouraged 
because  they  at  first  obtain  no  assistance  from  those  who 
naturally  would  be  supposed  to  have  at  hand  the 
technical  information  required.  Many  who  are  interested 
in  typewriters  in  a  commercial  way  have  had  no  occasion 
to  give  special  attention  to  this  phase  of  the  subject 
and  may  inform  those  who  seek  information  that  the 
attempt  to  determine  the  date  of  a  typewriting  is  an 
entirely  hopeless  task.  There  are  necessarily  cases  where 


QUESTIONED  TYPEWRITING  441 

any  attempt  in  this  direction  is  fruitless,  but  this  fact 
can  only  be  ascertained  by  a  careful  investigation. 

It  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  typewriters 
of  the  various  kinds  were  not  manufactured  before 
certain  dates  and  that  changes  arid  improvements  are 
constantly  being  made  in  the  various  kinds  of  machines 
in  use  that  may  show  conclusively  that  a  document  must 
have  been  written  after  a  certain  definite  date.  As  an 
illustration,  the  Smith-Premier  narrowed  its  capital 
letter  designs  in  1896.  A  document  in  an  important 
Wisconsin  case  contained  hundreds  of  capital  letters; 
it  was  dated  1893;  it  was  written  on  a  Smith-Premier 
typewriter  and  the  capitals  were  all  of  the  narrow  de- 
sign,— the  conclusion  that  it  could  not  have  been  written 
in  1893  was  irresistible1. 

These  progressive  changes,  which  have  been  made  in 

JThe  case  of  Peshtigo  Lumber  Co.  vs.  Robert  O.  Hunt  et  al.  was 
tried  before  Honorable  Charles  M.  Webb,  of  the  Wisconsin  Supreme 
Court,  without  a  jury,  at  Grand  Rapids,  Wisconsin,  in  the  summer  of 
1903.  During-  the  progress  of  the  trial  the  question  arose  as  to  the 
genuineness  of  a  typewritten  document  introduced  in  evidence.  The 
^document  bore  the  date  of  August  7,  1893,  and  the  determination  of 
the  actual  date  of  the  typewriting  became  the  main  question  at  issue 
in  the  case. 

After  a  vigorously  contested  trial  it  was  shown  conclusively:  first, 
that  the  document  was  written  on  a  Smith-Premier  typewriter,  second, 
that  it  must  have  been  written  after  1896,  and  third,  that  it  was  actual- 
ly written  in  1903,  a  few  months  before  the  date  of  the  trial,  on  a 
certain  sample  machine  sent  out  on  approval  by  a  Milwaukee  type- 
writing company,  which  machine  was  found  and  brought  to  court. 

Mr.  Justice  Webb  in  the  course  of  his  able  opinion  says  of  this 
document:  "It  further  appears  that  defendant  Hunt,  during  the  month 
of  April,  1903,  by  himself  or  through  the  agency  of  some  other  person, 
falsely  made  and  prepared  what  purported  to  be  a  typewritten  copy 
of  the  record  in  its  altered  form  .  .  .  as  of  the  date  of  August 
7,  1893." 

This  final  decision  was  reached  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  at  the 
outset  it  was  considered  almost  a  hopeless  task  to  attack  the  type- 
written document.  At  the  beginning  of  the  inquiry  those  interested 
to  set  aside  the  fraudulent  paper  held  the  common  opinion  that  it  is 
exceedingly  difficult  if  not  impossible  to  identify  or  show  the  date  of 
a  questioned  typewritten  paper. 


442  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

typewriters  from  the  time  they  were  first  put  on  the 
market,  are  in  the  design,  size  and  proportions  of  the 
type  faces,  the  length  of  the  line  that  the  machine  will 
write,  the  vertical  spacing  between  the  lines,  the  number 
of  characters  on  the  machine  and  in  a  great  number  of 
other  particulars,  some  of  which  may  affect  the  written 
result  only  indirectly.  As  has  been  said  the  mere  length 
of  a  typewritten  line  may  show  that  a  writing  could  not 
have  been  done  at  a  certain  time.  Again,  it  may  be 
proved  or  admitted  that  a  paper  was  written  on  a  certain 
particular  machine,  and  the  typewriting  may  show  a 
combination  of  individual  characteristics,  defects  and 
conditions  that  did  not  develop  in  that  machine  until 
long  after  the  date  of  the  document  in  question.  It  is 
not  often  necessary  or  possible  to  show  by  the  typewrit- 
ing itself  and  that  alone  exactly  when  a  paper  was 
written,  but  it  may  be  possible  to  show  conclusively  that 
it  could  not  possibly  have  been  written  until  after  a 
certain  definite  date. 

Unlike  machines  of  a  different  character,  a  typewriter 
makes  a  continuous  record  of  its  own  history  and  to  read 
this  history  it  is  only  necessary  to  have  at  hand  a  suf- 
ficient amount  of  the  continuous  writing  of  the  machine. 
The  active  life  of  a  typewriter  ranges,  perhaps,  from 
five  to  twenty  years  and  during  this  period  its  work 
gradually  deteriorates,  from  the  condition  which  satis- 
fied the  inspectors  at  the  factory  down  to  work  so 
inferior  that  the  machine  is  discarded.  It  is  easy  to 
understand  how  a  document  written  on  a  certain  machine 
and  dated  back  would  not  match  the  condition  of  the 
machine  at  the  pretended  fraudulent  date.  The  faces 
of  many  letters  inevitably  become  broken,  worn  or  bat- 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING  443 

tered,  and,  with  successive  dated  specimens  of  work  of 
the  machine  at  hand  for  comparison,  it  can  be  shown 
with  absolute  certainty  when  defects  first  appeared. 
These  facts  can  often  be  shown  so  convincingly  that  they 
cannot  be  successfully  denied1. 

The  first  fact  to  be  considered  in  investigating  the 
date  of  a  typewriting  is  to  find  when  a  certain  kind  of 
machine,  the  work  of  which  is  in  question,  first  came  into 
use,  and  then  it  is  important  to  learn  and  to  be  able  to 
prove  when  any  changes  were  made  that  affected  the 
written  record.  Naturally  the  most  important  special 
points  for  consideration  are  the  design,  size  and  propor- 
tions of  the  type  faces.  There  have  been  constant 
changes  in  these  particulars  on  all  the  older  machines  on 
the  market,  and  in  such  an  investigation  it  is  simply 
necessary  to  have  for  comparison  authentic,  dated  speci- 
mens from  the  particular  kind  of  machine  the  work  of 
which  is  under  investigation. 

Fortunately,  the  Remington  typewriter,  which  has 
been  longest  on  the  market,  shows  continuous  changes 
during  its  long  history  that  indicate  unquestionably 
many  fixed  dates  in  the  work  of  this  machine.  These 
changes  were  made  in  the  natural  course  of  the  improve- 
ment of  the  typewriter,  but  the  result  is  just  as  useful 

'Now  a  large  amount  of  typewriter  work  done  in  Mr.  Rust's  office 
was  produced  here.  It  had  been  produced  in  court  already  in  agree- 
ments written  at  the  same  time,  almost  with  the  dates  of  these  receipts, 
and  not  one  of  them  has  any  such  characteristics. — Levy  vs.  Rust, 
New  Jersey  Chancery,  49  Atlantic,  1025. 

He  testified,  and  his  evidence  is  not  disputed  that  the  letters  and 
affidavits  showed  that  the  type  used  in  printing  them  was  of  the  same 
class  and  size,  that  certain  letters  (type)  were  defective,  broken  and 
out  of  repair,  that  certain  other  letters  were  out  of  alignment,  and  the 
spacing  between  certain  letters  was  too  great;  that  these  peculiarities 
and  defects  appeared  in  the  affidavits  and  typewritten  letters  and  the 
addresses  referred  to  which  were  typewritten. — State  vs.  Freshwater, 
30  Utah,  446  (1906). 


444  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

in  determining  the  date  of  a  typewriting  as  if  made 
definitely  for  this  explicit  purpose. 

The  interests  of  justice  would  be  served  if  all  manu- 
facturers would  deliberately  make  such  slight  changes  at 
intervals  of  not  more  than  five  years,  even  when  improve- 
ments and  changes  in  the  machine  did  not  actually 
require  it.  There  would  also,  no  doubt,  be  some  advan- 
tage in  a  business  way  to  the  manufacturer  in  being  able 
to  ascertain  the  age  of  his  machines  simply  by  inspecting 
their  work,  and  some  few  changes  have  been  made  in 
type  designs  for  this  particular  purpose.  All  changes 
in  type  designs  and  sizes  are  inconspicuous  and  entirely 
unknown  to  many  who  are  identified  with  the  typewrit- 
ing industry. 

A  consecutive  arrangement  of  specimens  of  dated 
writings  from  a  certain  machine  will  also  show  the  exact 
date  when  each  new  ribbon  was  put  on  the  machine  or 
other  changes  were  made,  and  a  fraudulently  dated  docu- 
ment may  not  match  the  condition  of  the  work  of  the 
machine  in  this  regard  on  the  date  it  bears.  The  machine 
may  also  have  been  repaired  between  the  allege'd  date 
and  the  actual  date  of  the  writing,  a  fact  which  would 
change  the  written  result  and  the  fraudulent  document 
would  not  then  correspond  to  the  writing  done  before 
the  repairs  were  made. 

Perhaps  the  most  important  typewriting  inquiry  to  be 
considered  is  that  of  identifying  a  typewritten  document 
as  the  work  of  a  particular  individual  machine.  There 
are  often  two  steps  in  such  an  inquiry,  the  first  being  the 
determination  of  the  fact  that  the  document  was  written 
on  a  certain  particular  kind  of  machine  and  the  second, 
that  it  was  written  on  a  certain  individual  machine. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING  445 

These  two  questions  are  quite  closely  related  and,  strange 
as  it  may  seem,  in  some  instances  it  is  easier  to  answer 
the  second  question  than  the  first,  especially  if  the  docu- 
ment is  brief  and  does  not  show  all  the  characters  and  is 
written  on  an  old  machine. 

Typewriting  individuality  in  many  cases  is  of  the  most 
positive  and  convincing  character  and  reaches  a  degree 
of  certainty  which  may  almost  be  described  as  absolute 
proof.  The  identification  of  a  typewritten  document  in 
many  cases  is  exactly  parallel  to  the  identification  of  an 
individual  who  precisely  answers  a  general  description 
as  to  features,  complexion,  size,  etc.,  and  in  addition 
matches  a  long  detailed  list  of  scars,  birth-marks,  de- 
formities and  individual  peculiarities1. 

In  identifying  a  typewriting,  as  in  determining  its 


^n  Judge  Tarrant's  court,  yesterday  the  attorney  for  the  plaintiff 
asked  to  have  a  juror,  naming-  the  man,  withdrawn  from  the  panel. 
The  request  was  granted  and  the  juror  was  excused.  Thereupon  it 
became  necessary  to  postpone  the  case. 

This  action  occurred  in  the  case  of  James  L.  Gates  against  the 
estate  of  George  Hiles,  in  which  the  sum  of  $20,000  is  involved.  The 
action  was  brought  by  Mr.  Gates  against  the  estate  to  recover  money 
alleged  to  be  due  under  a  contract.  The  plaintiff  claimed  that  in  1891, 
a  contract  was  made  between  him  and  Mr.  Hiles,  whereby,  in  consid- 
eration for  certain  lands,  Mr.  Hiles  would  hold  Mr.  Gates  harmless  for 
a  judgment  of  about  $20,000  secured  against  him  in  the  state  of 
Florida.  The  judgment  was  not  satisfied  by  Mr.  Hiles  and  Mr.  Gates 
was  obliged  to  pay  it.  Thereupon  Mr.  Gates  sued  to  recover  the 
amount. 

In  the  trial  of  the  case,  Mr.  Gates  introduced  what  purported  to 
be  a  letter  press  copy  of  the  contract  dated  1891,  as  the  original  had 
been  lost.  .  .  .  An  expert  in  typewriting  was  called  as  a  witness 
and  testified  that  the  alleged  contract  could  not  have  been  made  earlier 
than  1896,  a  year  after  Mr.  Hiles'  death.  He  gave  an  extended  lecture 
to  show  how  typewritten  letters  vary  when  made  on  different  machines, 
or  on  the  same  machine  at  different  times. 

The  court  granted  an  adjournment  until  2  o'clock  Tuesday  after- 
noon and  continued  it  to  yesterday  morning  on  a  second  request.  A 
third  continuance  was  refused  and  to  avoid  endeavoring  to  rebut  testi- 
mony which  was  unexpected,  the  attorneys  took  advantage  of  the  un- 
usual proceeding  of  asking  the  withdrawal  of  a  juror. — Milwaukee 
"Sentinel,"  February  21,  1907. 


446  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

date,  the  type  faces  naturally  afford  the  greatest  field 
for  study,  and,  while  the  various  typewriting  machines 
approximate  the  same  style,  no  two  standard  machines 
are  alike  in  this  regard  (see  Figs.  15,  42)  except  some 
few  recent  machines  produced  under  the  same  manage- 
ment. A  large  majority  of  machines  of  all  kinds, 
probably  over  ninety-five  per  cent.,  use  what  is  called 
a  "pica"  style  of  type.  To  the  printer  this  indicates  a 
certain  definite  size  of  type  body,  made  of  exactly  the 
same  size  by  all  type  makers;  but  in  typewriting  it 
indicates  approximately  the  size  of  the  type  face  itself 
and  as  it  is  the  kind  of  type  most  used  on  all  machines 
it  consequently  is  that  most  frequently  found  in  a  ques- 
tioned document. 

There  is  a  great  diversity  of  taste  as  to  the  best  designs 
for  letters.  No  two  type-engravers  exactly  agree  as  to 
the  proper  proportions  of  the  various  characters  used  in 
printing;  and  the  result  is  that  there  are  almost  innumer- 
able styles  of  printed  letters  of  all  sizes.  This  is  true  of 
typewriting  letters  as  well  as  of  ordinary  print.  The 
various  typewriter  manufacturers,  while  following  a 
style  similar  in  general  features,  have  aimed  at  a  certain 
individuality  in  design  of  letters  and  have  vied  with  each 
other  in  producing  legible,  graceful  forms. 

Another  important  point  not  generally  understood  is 
that  the  mechanical  requirement  in  the  spacing  of  type- 
writing makes  it  necessary  that  all  letters,  capitals  and 
lower  case,  narrow  and  wide,  shall  be  given  the  same 
lateral  space.  This  in  ordinary  typewriting  is  one-tenth 
of  an  inch,  and  thus  arose  the  necessity  for  new  designs 
of  special  letters,  the  effort  being  directed  to  gaining 
the  appearance  of  uniformity  in  spacing  by  making  the 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING  447 

very  narrow  letters  wider  and  the  very  wide  letters  nar- 
rower than  in  ordinary  print  while  still  maintaining 
legibility  and  a  pleasing  appearance.  To  meet  this 
demand  an  entirely  new  class  of  engravers  has  been 
developed  and  modern  typewriters  show  the  result  of 
their  work. 

A  comparison  of  typewriting  with  ordinary  printing, 
spaced  according  to  the  actual  width  of  the  letters,  will 
show  what  a  marked  change  has  been  wrought  in  letter 
designs,  and  this  gradual  development  in  letter  designs 
and  proportions  makes  it  possible,  in  many  instances,  as 
has  been  outlined,  to  give  to  a  piece  of  typewriting  a 
very  definite  date  in  comparison  with  the  work  of  other 
machines  of  the  same  kind,  in  addition  to  showing  that 
a  document  was  written  on  a  certain  kind  of  machine. 

The  gradual  deterioration  of  the  work  of  a  typewriter 
gives  to  it  that  individuality  which  distinguishes  it  from 
the  work  of  other  machines  of  the  same  kind  and  also 
affords  the  means,  as  described  above,  by  which  it  is 
possible,  knowing  that  a  document  was  written  on  a 
particular  machine,  to  ascertain  when  it  was  written. 
This  latter  fact  is  shown  by  collecting  specimens  of  the 
work  of  the  machine  in  question  arranged  in  exact 
chronological  order,  which  will  show  the  development 
of  certain  irregularities  or  defects  that  only  become 
permanent  after  certain  definite  dates,  and  a  comparison 
of  these  specimens  with  the  document  in  question  may 
show,  for  instance,  that  abnormal  characteristics  due  to 
accidents  or  use  which  did  not  actually  develop  until 
after  January  or  February,  1910,  all  appear  in  a  docu- 
ment on  the  same  machine  dated  December,  1908. 

As  a  means  of  identifying  the  particular  machine 


448  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

upon  which  a  writing  was  done  or  determining  its  date 
the  examination  of  the  type  impression  should  be  made 
in  five  ways: 

First,  the  design,  size  and  proportions  of  all  the  char- 
acters. Second,  the  relation  of  the  character  as  printed 
to  adjacent  characters  or  the  vertical  and  horizontal 
alignment.  Third,  the  vertical  position  of  the  character 
in  relation  to  the  line  of  writing — that  is,  its  perpendicu- 
larity or  slant  to  the  left  or  right.  Fourth,  the  compara- 
tive weight  of  impression  of  the  upper,  lower,  right  or 
left  sides  of  each  character,  or,  as  the  machine  adjusters 
describe  it,  how  the  type  stands  "on  its  feet."  Fifth,  the 
condition  of  the  type  faces  and  the  presence  of  defects, 
bruises,  or  "scars"  in  the  letters  due  to  wear  or  to 
accidents. 

.  Divergences  from  perfect  conditions  in  these  five 
directions  make  it  possible  to  examine  and  describe  the 
characteristics  of  the  work  of  a  typewriting  machine  in 
great  detail.  If  typewriting  shows  clear  impressions  and 
includes  numerous  characters  and  there  are  at  hand 
proper  standards  of  comparison,  it  becomes  possible  to 
show  with  the  highest  degree  of  certainty  by  the  com- 
bination of  these  five  classes  of  characteristics,  that  a 
document  was  or  was  not  written  upon  a  certain  machine. 
Photographic  enlargements  of  from  two  to  four  diame- 
ters are  desirable  in  all  cases,  and  are  necessary  if  type- 
writing characteristics  are  to  be  effectively  shown. 

The  first  particular  specified  above,  the  design,  size, 
and  proportions  of  the  type  faces,  identifies  a  machine 
as  of  a  certain  kind  or  differentiates  it  from  others  of  a 
different  kind  and  also  from  others  of  the  same  kind 
carrying  a  different  style  of  type.  Differences  may  be 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING 


449 


FIG.   179— Enlargement  to  show  slight  but 
distinctive  divergence  in  design  of  Rem- 
ington and  Monarch  letters. 


small  and  not  observ- 
able under  ordinary 
view,  but  if  they 
actually  exist  they 
differentiate  two 
machines  as  certain- 
ly as  if  they  wrote 
two  different  lan- 
guages having  total- 
ly different  letter  de- 
signs. 

The  second  point 
is  that  of  alignment. 
Typewriter  types 
are  either  fastened  on  a  type  wheel  or  sleeve  or,  as  is 
usually  the  case,  are  attached  to  the  ends  of  printing 
arms  or  type-bars.  It  is  impracticable  to  attach  and 
adjust  these  separate  types  by  any  method  so  that  after 
actual  use  the  printed  letters  continue  to  bear  an  exact 
relation  to  each  other  like  printing  types,  and  diverg- 
ences from  exact  horizontal  and  vertical  alignment, 
which  in  their  combinations  extend  into  the  thousands, 
show  unmistakable  individuality1.  Entirely  new 
machines  usually  show  slight  but  persistent  differences 
which  are  readily  seen  upon  close  examination. 

In  alignment  each  character  may  occupy  any  one  of 
nine  positions.  In  ordinary  typewriting  each  letter 
occupies  an  imaginary  square,  ten  to  the  inch  horizontal- 

lrThe  fact  that  the  letters  in  typewritten  matter  are  in  exact  lines 
vertically  as  well  as  horizontally  is  sometimes  of  importance  in 
determining1  whether  a  disputed  interlineation  was  a  part  of  the 
original  writing-  before  the  paper  was  taken  out  of  the  machine.  It 
may  be  easy  to  show  that  an  interlineation  is  out  of  vertical  alignment 
with  the  writing  it  precedes  and  follows. 


450 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


DDDDDDnnDDDDDDDDDDDDnnDDDDDDnn 


nnnnnnDDDDnnnDDnnnnnnnnnDDnnnn 


FIG.  180 — Alignment  Test  Plate  on  Glass,  ten  to  an  inch, 
for  illustrating  defects  in  alignment. 


C1 
lUJi 


€*         ll  rif 

ti  ik  It  y^l 


FIG.  181 — Alignment  Test  Plate  over  typewriting  showing  letters 
out  of  alignment  and  defective  letters. 


FIG.  182— Enlargement  with  Test  Plate  over  Letters. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING 


451 


ly  and  six  to  the  inch  vertically,  typewriting  letters  being 
in  line  both  ways.  When  in  perfect  alignment,  the  letter 
occupies  the  middle  of  such  square,  and  when  out  of 
alignment  may  be  in  either  of  the  four  corners,  or  either 
side  of  the  middle  position  or  either  at  top  or  bottom, 
above  or  below  the  middle,  making  nine  positions  in 
all,  or  eight  possible  divergences  from  normal  in  this 
particular  alone.  Divergences  in  alignment  and  per- 
pendicularity in  a  shift  key  machine  affect  both  capitals 
and  small  letters  or  other  companion  characters,  since 
the  two  characters  are  on  one  piece  of  metal,  while  in  a 
double-case  machine  the  two  letters  are  independent. 
Careful  examination  of  this  point  is  usually  sufficient 
to  distinguish  the  work  of  a  single  case  machine  from 
that  of  a  double  case  machine  which  has  a  separate  key 
for  each  character. 

The  third  possible  divergence, 
the  perpendicular  position  of  the 
letter  in  relation  to  the  line,  is  of 
great  value  in  individualizing  a 
machine,  and  it  is  very  seldom  that 
machines,  even  when  new,  are  per- 
fect in  this  particular.  This  char- 
acteristic may  not  seem  very  pro- 
nounced until  typewriting  is  en- 
larged, when  it  can  be  seen  by  any  FIG.  iss-Typewriting  Pro- 
one,  and  it  is  a  characteristic  that  is 
fixed  and  continuous  and  is  not 
materially  changed  by  variations  in  speed  or  methods  of 
manipulation. 

Examination  of  the  work  of  any  typewriter  that  has 
been  in  actual  use  will  illustrate  the  fourth  variety  of 


tractor  for  measuring 
slant  of  diverg- 
ent letters. 


452 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


\ 


1-4..C 


ISt 


FIG.  184 — Typewriting  Protractor,  Fig.  183,  photo- 
graphed over  divergent  capital  E  out 
of  position  four  degrees. 

divergence  specified,  the  lack  of  uniformity  of  the 
impression  of  the  different  parts  of  the  several  char- 
acters. Typewriter  faces  are  not  flat  but  are  concaved 
to  conform  to  the  curve  of  the  printing  surface  of  the 
platen  or  roller.  When  properly  adjusted  all  portions 

print  uniformly,  but 
when  slightly  out  of 
position  in  any  direc- 
tion the  two  curved 
surfaces  are  not  par- 
allel and  thus  do  not 
come  together  with 
uniform  pressure, 
the  result  being  a 
difference  in  intens- 
ity in  different  parts  of  the  impression,  especially  in  light 
impressions1. 

Individuality  in  a  typewriter  is  shown  most  conclusive- 
ly by  the  fifth  point,  that  is,  the  combination  of  diverg- 

JIt  is  easy  to  understand  that  differences  in  intensity  of  different 
portions  of  the  type  face  may  not  be  seen  in  a  heavy  impression.  With 
a  new  and  heavily  inked  ribbon  or  when  struck  with  much  force  the 
whole  type  face  may  print  when  it  is  quite  uneven.  This  is  one  of  the 
variations  in  typewriting  that  should  be  carefully  noted. 


FIG.  185 — Upper  and  lower  case  W's  printing 
heavilv  on  left. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING 


453 


ences  and  defects  due  to  imperfections  in  the  letters  as 
originally  made,  accidental  collisions  of  the  types  with 
each  other  or  with  metallic  portions  of  the  machine,  and 
to  ordinary  wear.  If  two  machines  of  the  same  kind 
were  perfect  to  begin  with  and  in  perfect  condition— 
which  is  never  found  to  be  the  case  when  they  are 
critically  examined — the  work  from  one  could  not  be 
distinguished  from  that  of  the  other  until  actual  use  had 
affected  them  differently.  The  work  of  any  number  of 
machines  inevit- 
ably begins  to  di- 
verge as  soon  as 
they  are  used, 
and,  as  there  are 
thousands  of  pos- 
sible particulars 
in  which  differ- 
ences may  de- 
velop, it  very 
soon  begins  to  be 
possible  to  identi- 
fy positively  the 
work  of  a  particular  typewriter  if  the  writing  in  question 
includes  clear  prints  of  a  sufficient  number  of  the  char- 
acters and  a  sufficient  amount  of  genuine  writing  is  fur- 
nished for  comparison. 

The  principles  underlying  the  identification  of  type- 
writing are  the  same  as  those  by  which  the  identity  of  a 
person  is  determined  or  a  handwriting  is  identified.  The 
identification  in  either  case  is  based  upon  a  definite  com- 
bination of  common  or  class  features  in  connection  with 
a  second  group  of  characteristics  made  up  of  diverg- 


Zt 

' 

H  '' 

JQ.  ' 
10 

XI 

n 

n 

n 
n 

FIG.    186 — One  of  a  number  of  defective  letters 

tending  to  identify  a  disputed  typewriting. 

The  "x"  letters  disputed,  "a"  standard, 

and  two  letters  on  right  perfect 

letters  from  new  machine. 


454  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

erices  from  normal  features  which  thus  become  individ- 
ual peculiarities. 

The  mathematical  principles  outlined  in  the  fourteenth 
chapter  show  how  remote  is  the  possibility  of  coincidence 
of  even  a  few  scars  or  deformities  on  a  person,  and 
coincidence  of  scars  and  deformities  are  as  remote  with 
typewriters  as  with  persons1. 

The  problem  is  easily  stated  and  its  solution  is  not 
difficult.  Suppose  a  typewriter  has  three  broken  letters, 
three  letters  out  of  alignment,  three  letters  printing  "off 
their  feet,"  and  one  out  of  slant.  As  was  the  case  in 
considering  this  subject  in  relation  to  handwriting,  the 
mathematical  probability  of  a  combination  of  just  these 
characteristics  is  found  by  first  determining  how 
frequently  each  characteristic  will  be  found  and  the  con- 
tinued product  of  the  separate  probabilities  will  show 
how  frequently  they  will  all  unite  in  one  event. 

If  it  be  granted  that  in  every  ten  machines  (five 
hundred  would  be  nearer  the  fact)  a  certain  letter  face 
is  broken  or  worn  in  a  definite  way  this  will  give,  in  the 

'Although  disputed  typewriting  is  comparatively  new  in  courts  of 
law  the  question  has  arisen  in  numerous  important  cases  in  the  past 
few  years.  Some  of  these  are  here  briefly  mentioned: 

Hunt  vs.  Peshtigo  Lumber  Co.,  Marinette,  Wisconsin.  Tried  St 
Grand  Rapids,  Wisconsin,  1903.  James  L.  Gates  vs.  George  Hiles 
Estate,  tried  at  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin,  February,  1907.  The  Gamey 
Investigation,  at  Toronto,  Canada,  in  1903,  of  charges  by  R.  R.  Gamey, 
that  he  had  been  offered  a  bribe  of  $3000  by  Provincial  Secretary 
J.  R.  Stratton  to  vote  with  the  Liberal  Party.  Eleven  anonymous 
typewritten  letters  were  under  investigation  in  this  case. 

In  the  "Lilley  Investigation,"  Washington,  D.  C.,  conducted  by  a 
committee  of  congress  in  March,  1908,  a  question  arose  regarding  two 
anonymous  typewritten  letters.  In  the  Schooley-Crawford  will  case 
tried  at  Scranton,  Penn.,  the  question  regarding  the  identity  of  type- 
writing arose.  The  identification  of  typewriting  was  also  an  important 
feature  of  the  case  of  United  States  vs.  Everding,  tried  in  Washington, 
D.  C.,  January,  1909.  The  Groves  case  at  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.,  in 
May,  1910,  was  a  typewriting  inquiry,  and  the  Glazier  Insurance 
Assignment  investigation  at  Chelsea,  Mich.,  1910,  was  based  on  a 
number  of  disputed  typewritten  assignments. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING  455 

problem  stated  above,  three  fractions  of  one-tenth.  Then 
if  it  be  assumed  that  of  every  ten  machines  one  of  the 
three  selected  letters  will  print  off  its  feet  or  heavy  at 
top,  side  or  bottom  in  a  definite  way,  and  of  every  ten 
machines  one  of  the  three  selected  letters  will  be  out  of 
alignment  in  a  certain  definite  way,  and  on  one  of  every 
ten  machines  a  particular  letter  will  be  out  of  slant  in  a 
definite  way,  this  will  give  ten  fractions  of  one-tenth,  and 
the  continued  product  or  mathematical  probability  of 
these  particular  divergences  all  uniting  in  one  machine 
is  represented  by  a  fraction  with  one  for  a  numerator 
and  ten  billions  for  a  denominator. 

The  question  and  its  solution  can  be  put  in  another 
form  which  will  show  in  another  way  how  positive  type- 
writing identification  may  be.  As  a  problem  let  it  be 
assumed  that  a  clear  specimen  of  typewriting  shows,  for 
example,  twenty  distinct  characteristics  as  described 
above,  and  that  it  was  written  on  a  Remington  machine. 
Assuming  that  it  would  be  possible  to  make  a  great  col- 
lection of  all  the  machines  ever  constructed  by  this  com- 
pany the  task  then  would  be  to  find  from  the  number  the 
machine  on  which  the  specimen  was  written. 

It  would  be  necessary  to  take  the  first  characteristic 
and  put  in  one  group  all  the  machines  writing  that  par- 
ticular feature  and  exclude  all  the  other  machines.  Then 
the  second  characteristic  would  be  considered  and  from 
the  first  group  it  would  be  necessary  to  put  together  only 
those  machines  showing  both  the  first  and  second  feat- 
ures, then  with  the  group  remaining  the  same  is  done 
with  the  third  and  so  on  up  to  the  twentieth.  Finally 
every  machine  must  be  excluded  that  has  defects  or  in- 
dividualities not  shown  on  the  specimen,  and  it  is  easy  to 


456  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

understand  how  each  characteristic  would  decrease  the 
number  of  machines  in  the  group  until  finally  the 
machine  would  be  found  upon  which  the  specimen  was 
written. 

Illustrations. 

Appropriate  photographic  enlargements  and  illustra- 
tions are  essential  if  the  facts  are  to  be  shown  in  a  dis- 
puted typewriting  case;  and  this  is  particularly  true  if 
such  a  case  is  to  be  tried  before  a  jury.  The  few  half- 
tone illustrations  printed  herewith  will  show  in  a  measure 
what  is  possible,  but,  as  with  other  subjects  in  this  book, 
it  should  be  understood  that  in  the  restricted  space  and 
the  method  available  only  a  suggestion  can  be  made  as 
to  what  is  possible  with  large,  clear  photographs  showing 
every  detail. 

It  is  not  possible  to  print  reference  material  relating 
to  all  machines  in  use,  but  what  is  shown  will  suggest 
in  a  general  way  what  can  be  done  and  will  furnish  a 
basis  for  some  investigations. 

The  degree  of  enlargement  desirable  depends  upon 
conditions,  but  from  two  to  four  diameters  is  usually 
sufficient.  Much  typewriting  is  with  blue  and  purple 
ribbons,  and  appropriate  light  filters  or  color  screens  are 
absolutely  necessary  if  photographs  are  to  be  clear 
enough  to  be  of  any  use.  It  is  waste  of  time  and  money 
to  attempt  to  get  photographs  of  such  documents  from 
ordinary  photographers  who  do  not  possess  the  neces- 
sary apparatus. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING 


457 


TT  * 

D  .held 


FIG.  187 — Typewriting  characteristics  due  to  accidents. 


T  Q 


BIB 

B  B 


FIG.  188— Defective  letters  on  a  new  ma- 
chine. 


FIG.  189 -Disputed  and  Standard 
letters  "off  their  feet"  print- 
ing heavily  on  right  side. 


FIG.  190 — From  exhibit  in  case  of  Hunt  vs.  Peshtigo  Lumber  Co.,  Grand  Rapids, 
Wis.,  showing  capital  E  out  of  alignment. 


458 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


/checks 

>  checks 


'* 


checks 

checks 

^ cheeks 

/checks 

? check s 

? checks 

checks 

-checks 


* 


checks 


FIG.  191 — This  illustration  repre- 
sents two  specimens  from  each  of 
seven  machines  of  the  same  kind 
and  shows  how  it  is  possible  from  a 
few  letters  to  identify  typewriting. 
The  pairs  it  will  readily  be  seen  are 
1-4,  2-12,  3-13,  5-7,  6-8,  9-14,  10-11. 


Characteristics. 

In  the  first  pair,  one  and  four 
are  examples  of  defective  align- 
ment, broken  letters  and  letters 
printing1  "off  their  feet."  Numbers 
two  and  twelve  show  the  work  of 
a  machine  nearly  in  perfect  condi- 
tion and  more  than  these  six  let- 
ters would  be  required  to  identify 
work  from  it.  Three  and  thirteen 
show  two  letters  out  of  alignment. 
In  five  and  seven  the  h  is  defective 
and  the  k  prints  high.  Six  and 
eight  show  a  broken  h,  differing 
from  one  and  four,  and  also  a 
broken  k  that  prints  too  high.  Nine 
and  fourteen  show  an  unmistak- 
able broken  c  and  an  e  printing 
too  low.  Ten  and  eleven  show 
both  staffs  of  the  h  broken,  k  light 
at  top  and  e  mashed  on  right  side. 


QUESTIONED  TYPEWRITING  459 


-ABCDEF^iilJKLMNOPOFSTUVViXp 
-'A  J  (ID  E  F  G-H I J  KLM  N  0  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  V;  4  YZ 


AB  GDEPGH I JKLMNQP  QRS  TWVJXYZ 


ABODEPgHI  JKLIvD-TOPQRSTUVWXyZ 


ABC  DEPGH  IJKLMfTOPQRS  TUVWXYZ 


;  AB  CDEPGHI  JKU^OPgRSTUWjOCYZ 

abcdef ghij  kliaaop o  rs  tuvv/x  ;/s 
a  b  c. d  o  f  r>  h  i '  j  k  1.  rr,  n  o  p  q  r-s  t u  vwx  y rr 
ab^def  ghijklninopqrstuvwx^ 


abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz 
abcdefgliioklmnopqrstuvwx^'Z 
abc de f ghi j klmnop qr s tuvwxyz 

abcdefghi jklmnopqrs tuvwxyz 


FIG.  192 — Specimens  of  Remington  Inspection  Slips  from  1879  to  1906. 


ABCDEFGi)IJKLs!KQPQRSTlJVWXyZ<S    "r-:"    :-.i; 
abcdefgbajklmnc]  qrstuvwxyz   r--n    ny-n 
.This    is    a    specimen    of    the    v/ork 
t  ho   v;  o  rk    c  f    Ty  r-'  ?-V/  ri  t  e  f '  N  o  .  1  > » 
Aligned  .and.    adjusted    Juiy.>lst  •-1879. 
rev  e  re  n  1 1  a  1 1  y    sad  -^  e  s  t   v;a  r  ran  t  j  •  •    a,  c  c 


FIG.  193— Remington  Inspection  Slip  from  Machine  No.  13,  July  1st,  1879. 


qwer tyui  opasdf ghj  kizxc vbnrn 
Q  ¥EE  T  Y-J  TOP  A  S  DP  GH  JKLZ  X  C  VBxTM 
23456769  -0  ;  1.,  "  #$%_&'  (]     :  .? 
Rem  #10   #^2730   2-9-10 


ciwertyuiopasdfgnjklzxcTlDnm 

QWERTYUIOPASHFGHJKLZXOVBNM 


_ 

Smi-Pre  #10  fe8793  -2-16-10 


qwertjnii  opasdf  ghj 

QWERTYUI  OPASDF  G-HJZLZ2CY3UM 


Under  4  #284996  2-9-10 


qwertyuiopasdf ghj  klzxcvbnra 
QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM 
234567890-^ ; , "#$^_& '()*:? 
L'.C.S..#2-#71931.  3-21-10. 
qwertyuiopasdf  ghj  klzxcvlDnm 
Q.WERTYUIOPASDJGHJKLZXCVBffil 
234567890-  ;/.  ,  n#$^Jb'  ( )  :£? 
Mon  #3  #49298  2-9-10    

qwertyuiopasdf ghj klzxcvbnm 
QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM 


Qliv  #5  #295865  8-9-10 ' 
qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm 
,.  QWERTYUIOPASDFGHJKLZXCVBNM 
234567890 -;,"#$$_&'()*:? 
Roy  •#!  #56415.  2-9-10. 


FIG.  194 -Specimens  from  seven  typewriters  showing  designs  of  letters. 

[460] 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING  461 


•MM 


tyuiopas 

tyufdpas 


r 


tyuiopas 


r 


tyuiopas 


r 


tyuiopas 


r 


tyuiopas 


rtyuifbpas 


FIG.  195 — Nine  letters  enlarged  from  each  of  seven  different  typewriters  show- 
ing different  designs  of  letters.  The  machines  are  Remington,  Smith-Premier, 
Underwood,  L.  C.  Smith,  Monarch,  Oliver  and  Royal.  The  first  four  are  unmistak- 
ably different  in  many  ways;  in  one  and  five  the  "r"  and  "a"  are  not  the  same  and 
in  six  and  seven  the  small  "t,"  "u"  and  "a"  are  not  the  same.  The  small  letters  in 
No.  2  it  will  be  observed  are  larger  than  the  specimens  from  the  other  machines. 


462  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


faster  Sunday,    1909. 

!!rs.  Tflson: 

I  an  the  person  who  had  the  unpleasant  taak  of  renoving  your 
late  husband  fron  this  world. 

In  this  connection  my  chief  regret  WEB  in  ronbinr  i'our  little 
girl  of.  her  father,  hut  as  things  go  the  innocent  must  frequently 
suffer  with  the  guilty. 

I  an  not  'in  a  position  to  adequately  recompense  her,  hut  I  hr.v< 
.  roraised  to  do  what  'I  can  for  her.  an^  that  I  have  done.  Yon 


"hile  thia  money"  is  only  a  snail  mount,  it  shows  how  T  fnel  in 
this  unhappy  natter,  and  '  much  desire  that  it  go  to  its  proper  destinetic 
Perhaps,  aorseciey  I  sholl  be  able  to  do  something  hanlsone  for  vera. 

"any -people  say  "TYerything  happens  for  the'hest"  .-'her.  »ve  think  of 
our  griefs  -  you  of  yours,  ±tac±sxkiontxtotxkiribljautxXiax  T  of  cine,  it  '.la 
herd  to  realise  this,  yet  way  down  deep  7  hare  faith  it  is  no,  and  that 

"TO  x::or"  ALL  IF  TO  F-.TP.O  T^E  ALL" 


FIG.  196 — The  beginning  and  ending  of  an  interesting  typewritten  letter  from  the 
murderer  to  the  wife  of  the  victim  in  the  noted  "Wilson  murder  case,"  Philadelphia. 


POSIALTELEGRAPH  COMMERCIAL  CABLES 


>ostal  T«l«graph.Cable  Company  (Incorporattdl  !r3ns.r:,ts  an,!  clivers  this  messan*  subject  to  the  terms  and  conditions  printta  on  the  back  of  thi«  blan 


igo 


voted  for  tn±tt  |l,476f.396.--60-  -graft|-  in  -the  Naval  committee 
Tnere  is  a  sjroryiln  circulatior.  that  the  Holland  people  sot  a 

to  become  a-  candidate     against   Loud:  -last  tirse- 


that   Loud  finally  agreed  to  vote     for  the  submarines       upon  deal 
t-ha*-    the  -att-orn**y-^rit]idraw-  the—  attorney-  withdrew.  - 

Subscribe  fo*  N.Y.   HERALD  and  Washington  POST. 

Lo«4  —  o-afe--  -AMMtojeat^d-  on-  this-  -pro^es-i-t  ion  alone  by  you. 

.Watch  Congressional  Record. 
—-Have  your  lo<  ^al-  papers  play  up  pr  o-po-s-i  tlxm,  — 

Have  them  vrr:Lte  Loud  f^  r  explanation     and  whether  the 
withdrawal  story-  '.is-  t-rue.  ___ 
„  .    •  hy    '  _ 


FIG.  197 — One  of  the  anonymous  typewritten  letters  in  the  "Lilley  Submarine 
Boat  Investigation,"  Washington,  D.  C  ,  1908.  Before  the  inquiry  was  concluded 
the  actual  writer  confessed,  confirming  the  previous  testimony  identifying  the 
machine  upon  which  the  writing  was  done.  The  investigation  was  conducted  by  a 
committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  which  Hon.  H.  S.  Boutell,  of 
Illinois,  was  chairman. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING 


463 


7>/^/ 


/>  0 


ec  /  e  ft 


a.  c   i   .  ?i  e 


f  141 6  f  745 
|I  040  1 671 

141 6  *  96  < 


/7 


'/' 


FIG.  198 — Anonymous  and  Standard  typewriting  from  an  exhibit  in  the  Lilley 
Investigation,  Washington,  D.  C.,  1908. 


Boron  &Si  11 
.n  a  powder< 


FIG.  199 — From  exhibit  in  case  of  United  States  vs.  Everding,  Washington, 
D.  C.  Henry  E.  Everding,  of  Philadelphia,  a  patent  attorney,  and  Ned  W. 
Barton,  an  examiner  in  the  Patent  Office,  were  convicted,  Jan.  1909,  of  "altering 
certain  records  in  the  United  States  Patent  Office."  It  will  be  seen  from  the  small 
"r"  that  the  interlined  matter  was  by  a  different  machine. 


464 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


wxysiwxyz 


FIG.  200 — Exhibit  showing  difference  in  size  and  designs  of  Smith-Premie'r  (at  left) 

and  Remington  typewriting.     Smith-Premier  small  letters 

7%ooo  high;  Remington  68/iooo. 


FIG.  201 — From  exhibits  in  case  tried  at  Olean,  N.  Y.,  July,  1910.     Stand- 
ard typewriting  on  left,  disputed  on  right. 


QUESTIONED   TYPEWRITING 


465 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

A  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENT  CASE  IN  COURT 

Before  an  expert  or  opinion  witness  is  allowed  to 
testify  the  law  requires  that  he  be  "qualified"  in  a  legal 
way  to  give  such  testimony.  This  qualifying  process 
consists  in  showing  that  the  witness  has  had  such 
preparation  and  experience  as  legally  qualifies  him  to 
give  an  opinion  in  court  on  the  subject  in  dispute. 

Instead  of  simply  asking  the  witness  to  state  his  quali- 
fications, as  is  sometimes  done,  it  is  much  better  to  draw 
from  him  the  necessary  information  by  a  few  properly 
arranged  questions.  The  jurors  do  not  always  under- 
stand that  this  qualifying  of  a  witness  is  a  legal  require- 
ment, and  if  a  witness  is  required  to  say  ofF-hand  and 
at  considerable  length  what  his  qualifications  are  and  his 
experience  has  been,  the  act  sometimes  appears  to  them 
like  an  exhibition  of  self-conceit.  This  is  a  particularly 
unfortunate  impression  to  give  as  an  introduction  to 
testimony. 

At  the  same  time  it  is  important  that  the  jury  should 
be  informed  in  considerable  detail  as  to  the  qualifications 
and  experience  of  a  witness  who  is  to  give  opinions,  which 
information  can  be  brought  before  them  in  an  entirely 
unobjectionable  way  by  a  series  of  questions  as  sug- 
gested. This  information  as  to  qualifications  should 
usually  be  brought  out  before  the  jury  and  entered  on 
the  record,  even  if  opposing  counsel  is  willing  to  admit 
that  the  witness  is  a  qualified  expert.  This  is  important 

[466] 


Insert  in  Osborn's  Questioned  Documents  at  page  466;  3  Wigmore  on  Evi- 
dence, p.  2647;  3  Chamberlayne's  Evidence,  p.  2927;  15  Am.  &  Eng.  Enc.  of 
Law,  2d  Ed.,  265;   3  Jones  on  Evidence,  p.  429. 


The  Law 

of 

Handwriting  and  Questioned  Docu 
ments  in  the  State  of  New  York 


COPYRIGHT,  1921, 

BY  ALBERT  S.  OSBORN 

NEW  YORK 


INTRODUCTORY. 


Under  the  old  law  in  New.  York,  as  well  as  nearly  all  the  other 
states,  handwriting  testimony  practically  consisted  of  a  mere  opinion. 
If  opposing  counsel  saw  fit,  he  could  call  for  reasons  upon  which  the 
opinion  was  based,  but  in  the  absence  of  cross-examination  the  mere 
opinion  was  before  the  court.  In  the  event  of  an  opposing  opinion 
without  reasons  being  given,  one  opinion  offset  the  other  and  the 
result  was  the  same  as  though  no  testimony  on  the  question  had  been 
given.  The  decisions  contain  many  severe  criticisms  of  "expert 
testimony"  of  this  kind  which  is  still  being  given  regarding  many 
medical  and  other  subjects. 

Since  the  year  1880  in  New  York,  before  which  time  no  genuine 
writing  as  standards  of  comparison  was  admitted,  there  has  been  a 
gradual  tendency  of  the  courts  toward  a  procedure  by  which  a  dis- 
puted document  trial  has  become,  as  it  should  be,  a  legally  super- 
vised scientific  investigation.  The  courts  of  the  progressive  states, 
including  New  York,  have  practically  come  to  say  that  testimony 
regarding  a  tangible  thing  that  is  before  the  court,  and  can  be  seen, 
illustrated,  and  enlarged,  and  about  which  testimony  can  be  given 
with  full  and  explicit  reasons,  is  not  testimony  that  is  simply  to  be 
believed  or  not  believed.  Testimony  of  this  kind  is  an  appeal,  not  to 
the  credulity  of  the  hearer,  but  to  his  intelligence.  If  he  understands 
and  is  convinced  then  he  should  accept  the  testimony,  or,  on  the  other 
hand,  if  he  is  not  convinced  then  he  is  not  to  give  credit  to  it.  Under 
the  conditions  this  testimony  is  not  "expert  testimony"  in  the  strict 
sense,  but  demonstrative  testimony.  As  is  said  in  otie  of  the  New 
York  opinions,  quoted  on  the  following  pages,  '  ...  if  sup- 
ported by  sufficiently  cogent  reasons  testimony  might  amount  almost 
to  a  demonstration."  The  attitude  of  some  courts  is  still  somewhat 
affected  by  the  ancient  procedure,  but  under  the  changed  conditions  it 
is  now  possible  to  prove  the  facts  and  win  in  cases  that  under  the 

old  rules  could  not  have  been  won. 

ALBERT  S.  OSBORN, 

Examiner  of  Documents. 
2264-6  Woolworth  Bldg., 
233  Broadway, 

New  York,  N.  Y. 


THE  LAW  OF 
HANDWRITING  AND  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS  IN 

THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK. 
(a)  QUESTIONS  RELATING  TO  STANDARD   WRITINGS. 


Admission  of  Standard  Writings 
for  Purposes  of  Comparison. 

"Laws  of  1880,  Chapter  36,  Section 
1.  Comparison  of  a  disputed  writing, 
with  any  writing  proved  to  the  satis- 
faction of  the  court  to  he  genuine, 
shall  he  permitted  to  he  made  hy  wit- 
nesses in  all  trials  and  proceedings, 
and  such  writings  and  the  evidence  of 
witnesses  respecting  the  same  may  he 
submitted  to  the  court  and  jury  as 
evidence  of  the  genuineness,  or  other- 
wise, of  the  writing  in  dispute." 
Quoted  in  People  v.  Molineux,  168  N. 
Y.  322,  61  N.  E.  286. 
Admission  of  Other  Writing 
Tending  to  Prove  Who  Forged 
the  Disputed  Writing. 

"Chapter  555  of  the  Laws  of  1888: 
'An  act  to  amend  the  law  of  evidence 
and  practice  on  civil  and  criminal 
trials,'  is  herehy  amended  so  as  to 
read  as  follows: 

'Section  2.  Comparison  of  a  dis- 
puted writing  with  any  writing 
proved  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  court 
to  be  the  genuine  handwriting  of  any 
person,  claimed  on  the  trial  to  have 
made  or  executed  the  disputed  instru- 
ment, or  writing,  shall  he  permitted 
and  submitted  to  the  court  and  jury 
in  like  manner.' 

The  act  of  1888  does  not  repeal  or 
supersede  the  act  of  18 8O,  but  enlarges 
the  operation  of  the  latter  by  admit- 
ting evidence  of  the  kind  which  it  was 
thought  had  been  decided  in  Peck  v. 
Gallaghan  to  be  inadmissible  under 
the  statute  of  1880.  In  other  words, 
it  authorizes  evidence  which  would 
establish  forgery  of  the  disputed 
writing  by  a  particular  person." 
People  v.  Molineux,  p.  323. 
Admission  of  Request  Writings. 

"Another  objection  made  by  the  de- 
fendant at  the  trial  to  the  standards 
of  comparison  admitted  by  the  court 
was  the  so-called  'request  writings.' 
The  circumstances  in  which  those 
writings  were  made  by  the  defendant 
have  already  been  detailed.  We  are 
of  the  opinion  that  it  was  not  error 
to  receive  them  in  evidence."  People 
v.  Molineux,  p.  325. 


Sufficiency  of  Proof 
of  Standards. 

"In  civil  cases  the  genuineness  of 
such  a  paper  must  be  established  by 
a  fair  preponderance  of  the  evidence 
and  in  criminal  cases  beyond  a  reason- 
able doubt.  Writings  proved  to  the 
satisfaction  of  the  court  by  the 
methods  and  under  the  rules  adverted 
to,  may  be  used  as  standards  for  pur- 
poses of  comparison  with  a  disputed 
writing,  subject,  however,  to  the 
qualification  that  writings  which  are 
otherwise  incompetent,  .should  never 
be  received  in  evidence  for  purposes 
of  comparison."  People  v.  Molineux. 
p.  328. 

"The  sufficiency  of  the  proof  given 
of  the  genuineness  of  the  papers 
offered  as  standards  is  a  preliminary 
point  to  be  determined  in  the  first 
instance  by  the  court  before  per- 
mitting the  papers  to  go  to  the  jury. 
If  the  court,  having  regard  to  the 
rules  adverted  to,  adjudge  the  papers 
genuine,  it  then  becomes  the  duty  of 
the  jury  in  its  turn,  at  the  proper 
time,  before  making  comparison  of  a 
disputed  writing  with  the  standards, 
to  examine  the  testimony  respecting 
the  genuineness  of  the  latter  and  to 
decide  for  itself,  under  proper  legal 
instructions  from  the  court,  whether 
their  genuineness  has  been  estab- 
lished." People  v.  Molineux,  p.  330. 
See  also  Mutual  L.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Suiter 
(1892),  131  N.  Y.  557,  29  N.  E.  822; 
Mortimer  v.  Chambers  (1892),  63 
Hun,  335,  17  N.  Y.  Supp.  874;  Farrell 
v.  Manhattan  R.  R  Co.  (1903),  83 
App.  Div.  393,  82  N.  Y.  Supp.  334; 
People  v.  Carey  (1896),  148  N.  Y.  476, 
42  N.  E.  1066;  McKay  v.  Lasher 
(1888),  50  Hun,  383,  3  N.  Y.  Supp. 
3'52;  Clark  v.  Douglass  (1896),  5  App. 
Div.  547,  40  N.  Y.  Supp.  769. 
Writings  Made  After  Event 
For  One's  Own  Benefit 
Not  Admissible. 

"Writings  created  post  litem  motam 
are  inadmissible  in  favor  of  a  party 
creating  them.  (Chamberlayne's  Best 
on  Ev.,  236;  Hickory  v.  U.  S.,  151  U. 
S.  303.)"  People  v.  Molineux,  p.  326. 


Pencil  Writing  As  Standard. 

Mutual  L.  Ins.  Co.  v.  Suiter  (1892), 
131  N.  Y.  557,  29  N.  E.  822. 

Standard  Writing  Not  Limited  to 
That  Some  Witness  Saw  Written. 

"The  claim  of  the  defendant's  counsel 
seems  to  be  that  no  writing  can  be 
admitted  in  evidence  for  the  purpose 
of  comparison,  under  the  act  of  1880, 
excepting  such  as  some  witness  can 
prove  he  saw  the  party  write.  This 
claim  is  not  well  founded.  .  .  .  How 
that  proof  is  to  be  made  depends,  as 
I  should  suppose,  upon  the  general 
rules  of  evidence  applicable  to  the 
proof  of  a  party's  handwriting,  the 
only  condition  being  that  such  speci- 
men must  be  proved  to  be  genuine  to 
the  satisfaction  of  the  court."  McKay 
v.  Lasher  (1890),  121  N.  Y.  477. 

Admissibility   of   Irrelevant 
Document  to  Show  Error. 

"Where  a  witness  makes  a  mistake 
in  his  effort  to  distinguish  spurious 
from  genuine  signatures,  and  he  does 
not  acknowledge  the  error,  it  may  be 
shown  by  other  testimony."  [Ruling 
based  on  testimony  of  bank  clerk.] 
Hoag  v.  Wright  (1903),  174  N.  Y.  36, 
66  N.  E.  579. 

"One  of  the  signatures,  which  he  [a 
bank  clerk]  had  pronounced  genuine, 
had  been  written,  inferentially,  by  an 
expert  in  handwriting.  ...  It  was 
obviously  an  unfair  test  and  the  court 
did  not  abuse  its  discretionary  power 
in  the  cross-examination."  People  v. 
Patrick  (1905),  182  N.  Y.  131,  175, 
74  N:  E.  843. 

Admission  of  Standards  to  Prove 
Obscure,  Puzzling  or  Uncertain 
Handwriting. 

"From  an  inspection  of  the  note  it 
would  be  difficult  to  say  whether  the 
time  written  in  the  note  on  the  blank 
space  before  the  printed  word  'months' 
was  two  or  four;  it  therefore,  became 
a  question  of  fact  for  the  jury.  The 
defendants  introduced  in  evidence  a 
number  of  checks  ...  in  some  of 
which  the  word  'Two'  was  written 
similarly  to  the  time  written  in  the 
note  and  in  others  the  word  'Four' 
was  written  legibly  and  spelled  cor- 
rectly. We  think  the  case  was  fairly 
submitted  .  .  ."  State  Bank  v. 
Postal  (1895),  12  Misc.  546,  34  N.  Y. 
Supp.  18. 


Witness  Compelled  to  Write  and 
Thus  Produce  Standards  of 
Comparison. 

"While  Mrs.  Vogt  was  being  cross- 
examined  by  the  District  Attorney, 
one  of  the  jurors,  with  the  consent  of 
the  court,  asked  her  to  write  her  own 
and  her  husband's  name,  on  a  slip  of 
paper,  which  she  did.  The  defendant's 
counsel  objected  to  the  signatures 
being  put  in  evidence.  .  .  .  We  think 
the  court  below  committed  no  error  in 
allowing  the  signatures  to  be  intro- 
duced in  evidence  under  the  circum- 
stances of  this  case."  People  v.  De- 
Kroyft  (1888),  49  Hun  71,  71  N.  Y. 
Supp.  692;  Bronner  v.  Loomis,  14  Hun 
341;  Miles  v.  Loomis,  75  N.  Y.  288, 
31  Am.  Rep.  470,  62  L;  R.  A.  850. 
Witness  or  Party  Cannot  Write 
For  His  Own  Benefit. 

"The  rule  does  not  permit  a  party, 
the  genuineness  of  whose  signature  is 
in  dispute,  to  write  his  name  in  the 
presence  of  the  court  and  jury  and 
then  give  it  in  evidence  in  his  own 
behalf."  People  v.  DeKroyft,  49  Hun 
(N.  Y.)  71. 

Expert  Must  Have  Before  Him 
the  Writings  About  Which 
He  Testifies. 

Hynes  v.  McDermott  (1880),  82  N.  Y. 
41,  37  Am.  Rep.  538. 
Standards   of  Comparison 
Proved  by  Correspondent. 

Sprague  v.   Sprague    (1894),  80  Hun 
285,  30  N.  Y.  Supp.  162. 
Found  Signatures  Even  in  Proper 
Custody,  Not  Admitted. 

Farrell  v.  Manhattan  R.  Co.   (1903), 
83  App.  Div.  393,  82  N.  Y.  Supp.  334; 
Hobard    v.    Verrault    (1902),    74    App. 
Div.  444,  77  N.  Y.  Supp.  483. 
Doubtful  Signatures  not 
Admitted  as  Standards  of 
Comparison. 

Clark    v.    Douglass     (1896),    5    App. 
Div.   547,  40  N.  Y.   Supp.   769. 
In  Comparison  of  Handwritings 
All  the  Writings  Must  Be  Before 
the  Court. 

"In  all  cases  where  evidence  has 
been  allowed  because  of  qualification 
by  comparison  of  handwritings,  all  the 
writings  must  be  before  the  court  so 
that  the  opposite  party  may  have  an 
equal  opportunity  for  comparison." 
Matter  of  Burbank,  104  App.  Div.  318. 


Admissibility  of  Typewriting 
For  Purposes  of  Comparison. 

".  .  .  The  District  Attorney  was 
permitted,  over  the  defendant's  objec- 
tion and  exception,  to  introduce  in  evi- 
dence another  paper  prepared  by  a 
witness,  who  was  at  the  time  the  de- 
fendant's law  partner,  upon  the  de- 
fendant's typewriter  .  .  ."  ".  .  .  No 
valid  reason  is  perceived  why  admitted 
or  established  samples  of  that  work 


should  not  be  received  in  evidence  for 
purposes  of  comparison  with  other 
typewritten  matter  alleged  to  have 
been  produced  upon  the  same  machine." 
People  v.  Storrs  (1912),  207  N.  Y.  147, 
100  N.  E.  730. 

Jury  May  Take  Writings  to 
Jury  Room. 

Hardy  v.  Norton,  66  Barber  527,  62 
L.  R.  A.  850. 


(b)  THE  GIVING  OF  REASONS  FOR  EXPERT  OPINION. 


Reasons  for  Expert  Opinion. 

Of  course,  all  the  facts  .  .  .  upon 
which  the  opinion  is  based  may  be 
drawn  out  .  .  .  either  upon  the  direct 
or  cross  examination.  People  v. 
Faber  (1910),  199  N.  Y.  256,  9'2  N.  E. 
674. 

In  this  state  the  prartice  of  per- 
mitting handwriting  experts  to  give 
the  reasons  for  their  opinion  .  .  .  has 
been  distinctly  approved.  The  rea- 
sons for  the  expert's  opinion,  if  he 
had  been  permitted  to  give  them, 
might,  and  probably  would,  have  added 
great  force  to  his  testimony.  John- 
son Service  Co.  v.  MacLernon  (1911), 
127  N.  Y.  Supp.  432,  142  App.  Div. 
677. 

"It   is    sufficient   to    say    that   many 


of  the  objections  were  trivial  and 
pointless  except  as  they  served  to 
break  up  the  witness  and  prevent  a 
connected  statement  of  his  reasons. 
.  .  .  The  conclusion  of  a  handwriting 
expert  as  to  the  genuineness  of  a 
signature,  standing  alone,  would  be  of 
little  or  no  value;  but,  supported  by 
sufficiently  cogent  reasons,  his  testi- 
mony might  amount  almost  to  a 
demonstration.  While  the  court  in 
this  case  did  not  directly  refuse  to 
allow  the  experts  to  state  their  rea- 
sons .  .  .  the  effect  of  allowing  con- 
stant trivial  objections  and  of  the 
erroneous  rulings  was  virtually  equi- 
valent to  such  denial."  Venuto  v. 
Lizzo  (1912),  148  App.  Div.  164,  132 
N.  Y.  Supp.  1066. 


(c)  THE  ADMISSIBILITY  OF  PHOTOGRAPHS. 


Admissibility  of  Photographs  in 
Disputed  Document  Cases. 

It  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  any  rea- 
son why  in  a  court  of  justice,  a  dif- 
ferent rule  of  evidence  should  exist 
in  respect  to  the  magnified  image, 
presented  to^the  eye  by  the  lens  in 
the  microscopist's  instrument,  from 
that  which  applies  to  the  same  image, 
presented  by  the  lens  in  the  photo- 
grapher's camera,  and  permanently 
delineated  upon  sensitive  paper.  .  .  . 
Wherever  what  they  disclose  can  aid 
or  elucidate  the  just  determination  of 
legal  controversies,  there  can  be  no 
well-founded  objection  to  resorting  to 
them.  Frank  v.  Chemical  Nat.  Bank 
(1874),  37  N.  Y.  34,  5  Jones  &  S.  26. 

"But  when  care  is  taken  to  first 
verify  that  the  process  by  which  the 
photograph  was  taken  was  conducted 
with  skill  and  under  favorable  cir- 
cumstances, and  that  the  result  has 
been  a  fair  resemblance  of  the  object, 
the  picture  produced  may,  in  many 
of  the  issues  for  a  jury,  be  an  aid  to 
determination.  ...  In  Marcy  v. 


Barnes  (1-6  Gray,  162  Mass.)  photo- 
graphic copies,  on  an  enlarged  scale, 
of  writings  conceded  to  be  genuine, 
and  of  writings  disputed,  were  held 
competent  for  submission  to  the  jury 
with  the  writings  themselves,  on  a 
question  of  genuineness  of  handwrit- 
ing." Cowley  v.  People,  83  N.  Y. 
478,  479,  36  L.  R.  A.  (N.  S.)  633. 

Right  to  Inspect  and  Photograph 
Evidential  Documents. 

"A  court  of  record,  other  than  a  jus- 
tice's court  in  a  city,  has  power  to 
compel  a  party  to  an  action  pending 
therein,  to  produce  and  discover,  or 
to  give  to  the  other  party,  an  inspec- 
tion and  copy,  or  permission  to  take  a 
copy  or  photograph,  of  a  book,  docu- 
ment, or  other  paper,  or  to  make  dis- 
covery of  any  article  of  property,  in 
his  possession  or  under  his  control, 
relating  to  the  merits  of  the  action, 
or  of  the  defence  therein."  Chase's 
Code  Civil  Procedure,  Par.  803. 
Amended  in  1913  by  addition  of  words 
"or  photograph." 


(d)  THE  USE  OF  CHART  OR  BLACKBOARD  BY  EXPERT  WITNESS. 


Use  of  Chart  or  Blackboard. 

"It  is  next  claimed  that  the  court 
erred  in  permitting  an  expert  witness 
as  to  handwriting,  called  by  'plain- 
tiffs, to  make  illustrations  on  the 
blackboard  (before  the  jury  for  the  pur- 
pose of  explaining  his  testimony  and 
rendering  it  more  intelligible  to  them. 
In  this  we  see  no  error."  McKay  v. 

(e)  QUALIFICATIONS  OF 
Court  Determines  Qualifications 
of  Expert. 

"On  every  question  arising  which  in- 
volves a  point  in  science  or  art,  which 
includes  handwriting,  persons  specially 
skilled  therein  become  competent  to  ex- 
press an  opinion,  and  such  opinion  is 
deemed  a  relevant  fact.  Such  per- 
sons are  denominated  'expert  wit- 
nesses' and  it  is  for  the  court  to  de- 
termine whether  the  skill  of  the  per- 
son offered  is  sufficient  to  be  deemed 
an  expert,  and  such  determination  is 
the  subject  of  review."  Hadcock  v. 
O'Rourke  (1889),  6  N.  Y.  Supp.  549. 
Trial  Judge's  Decisions  as  to 
Competency  of  Expert  Not 
Subject  For  Review. 

People  v.  Fletcher  (1899),  44  App. 
Div.  199,  60  N.  Y.  Supp.  777. 


Lasher     (1890),     121     N.     Y.     477,     24 
N.    E.    711. 

"In  this  state  the  practice  permit- 
ting handwriting  experts  .  .  .  even  to 
illustrate  upon  a  blackboard  has  been 
distinctly  approved."  Johnson  Ser- 
vice Co.  v.  MacLernon  (1911),  142  N. 
Y.  App.  Div.  677,  127  N.  Y.  Supp.  431. 


EXPERT  WITNESSES. 
Competency  of  Expert  Not 
Affected  by  Not  Having  Seen 
Party  Write. 

Hadcock  v.  O'Rourke  (1889),  25 
N.  Y.  S.  R.  55,  6  N.  Y.  Supp.  549; 
People  v.  Coombs  (1899),  36  App.  Div. 
284,  55  N.  Y.  Supp.  276. 

Admissibility  of  Evidence  of 
Expert  Microscopist. 

"The  testimony  objected  to  bore  di- 
rectly upon  the  question  as  to  whether 
the  note  and  signature  had  been 
changed  or  tampered  with  after  it  was 
written  and  tended  to  establish  that 
it  had  not  ...  It  ...  was  therefore 
competent  as  bearing  upon  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  signature."  Hadcock  v. 
O'Rourke  (1889),  6  N.  Y.  Supp.  549. 


(f)  QUESTIONS  RELATING  TO  TESTIMONY  BY  LAY  WITNESSES. 


One  Who  Has  Merely  Seen  the 
Writing  Not  Qualified  to  Testify 
Regarding  it  Unless  Witness  Has 
"Intelligent    Acquaintance" 
With   it. 

"He  should  have  an  intelligent  ac- 
quaintance with  the  handwriting  of 
the  party  so  that  he  can  determine 
with  a  reasonable  degree  of  certainty 
whether  the  writing  offered  is  his 
genuine  handwriting.  It  seems  very 
clear  that  neither  of  these  witnesses 
had  any  such  knowledge."  People  v. 
Corey  (1900),  148  N.  Y.  476,  42  N.  E. 
1066. 

Cross  Examination  of  Lay 
Witness  Who  Gives  Reasons 
For  Opinion. 

"We  think  the  question  was  proper 


.  .  and  the  plaintiff  had  a  right  to 
test  the  witness  and  ascertain  the 
grounds  of  his  opinion."  Winne  v. 
Tousley  (188i5),  36  Hun  190'. 

Non-Expert  Cannot  Give* 
Testimony  Based  on  Comparison. 

"If  one,  who  was  not  an  expert, 
were  permitted  to  give  his  opinion  as 
to  genuineness  of  handwriting,  based 
merely  on  comparison  ...  it  would 
be  usurping  the  duty  of  the  jury." 
McKay  v.  Lasher  (1886),  42  Hun 
(N.  Y.)  270. 


Bank  Clerks  Allowed  to  Testify 
as   Experts. 

People    v.    Fletcher,     44    App. 
199,  60  N.  Y.  Supp.  777. 


Div. 


(g)  DIRECT   COMPARISON   MORE    RELIABLE   THAN   RECOLLECTION. 

of  a  Writing  With  Memory  of 
Writing  Previously  Seen. 

"It  cannot  be  denied  that  abstractly 
a    witness   is    more    likely    to    form    a 


Direct  Comparison  of  Writing 
More  Reliable  as  Means  of 
Determining  Falsity  or 
Genuineness  Than   Comparison 


correct    judgment    as    to    the    identity 
of    handwriting   by   comparing   it  min- 


party    write    but    once    and    then    per 
haps    under    circumstances    which    did 


utely  with  a  fair  and  genuine  speci-  not  awaken  his  attention."  Starkey 
men  of  the  party's  handwriting  than  on  Evidence,  .Volume  II,  page  375. 
he  would  be  able  to  make  by  compar-  Quoted  with  approval  in  Miles  v. 


ing  what  he   sees   with   the   faint    im- 
pression    made    by     having     seen     the 


Loomis    (1878),  75  N.  Y.   297. 


(h)  QUESTIONS  RELATING  TO  DOCUMENTS  THAT  ARE  SUBJECTS 
FOR  EXPERT  TESTIMONY. 


Individuality  in  Handwriting. 

"The  general  rule  which  admits  of 
the  proof  of  the  handwriting  of  a  party 
by.  experts,  who  have  compared  the 
writing  with  other  writings  of  the 
person,  is  founded  on  the  reason  that 
in  every  person's  writings  there  is  a 
peculiar  prevailing  characteristic  which 
distinguishes  it  from  the  handwritings 
of  every  other  person."  Matter  of 
Hopkins  (1902),  172  N.  Y.  369,  65 
N.  E.  173. 

Proof  of  Sequence  of  Writings 
by  Crossed  Lines. 

•'An  expert  may  doubtless  be  able 
to  determine  whether  one  mark  is 
made  over  another."  Matter  of  Hop- 
kins (1902),  172  N.  Y.  369,  65  N.  E. 
173. 
Proof  of  Cross  Marks. 

"It  is  quite  possible  that  an  expert 
can  determine  whether  a  cross  was 
made  by  a  person  in  the  prime  of  life 
with  a  steady  hand,  or  by  a  person  of 
advanced  age,  with  a  feeble,  trembling 
or  shaking  hand.  Such  testimony  is 
not  based  upon  the  comparison  of 
writings  but  upon  the  condition  of  the 
individual  ...  It.  has  also  been  held 
that  the  mark  of  an  individual  to  an 
instrument  may  be  proved  by  those 
who  have  seen  him  make  his  mark  to 
other  instruments  where  the  mark  con- 
tains some  peculiarity  which  they  have 
noticed  and  observed,  thus  enabling 
them  to  distinguish  it  from  other 
marks."  Matter  of  Hopkins  (1902), 
172  N.  Y.  369,  65  N.  E.  173. 
Admissibility  of  Scientific 
Books. 

".  .  .  the  evidence  was  purely  hear- 
say   and    should    not    have    been    re- 
ceived."    Brown  v.  Newell   (1909),  132 
App.  Div.  548,  116  N.  Y.  Supp;  965. 
Expert  Testimony  to  Prove  Age 
of  Ink  or  Writing. 

"If  familiar  with  inks,  he  may  also 
be  alble  to  determine  nearly  the  age  or 
the  time  that  the  writing  was  made." 


Matter  of  Hopkins    (1902),   172   N.  Y. 
369,  65  N.  E.   173. 
Expert  Testimony  Regarding 
Identity  of  Ink. 

"An  expert  in  the  detection  of  coun- 
terfeits is  able  to  appreciate  these 
changes  (in  ink)  and  they  may  be 
quite  obvious  to  him,  while  to  the  jury 
they  may  be  wholly  unappreciable.  I 
am,  therefore,  of  opinion  that  it  was 
competent  to  ask  the  witness  the 
question  put  to  him,  and  the  objec- 
tion was  properly  overruled."  Dubois 
v.  Baker  (1864),  30  N.  Y.  355. 
Mere  Cancellation  Marks  Not 
Handwriting. 

"Mere  marks  or  scratches,  used 
either  perpendicularly  or  horizontally, 
over  a  signature  for  the  purpose  of 
cancelling  it,  do  not  contain  the  char- 
acteristics necessary  in  the  formation 
of  letters  to  enable  an  expert,  or  any 
person,  to  speak  with  any  degree  of 
certainty  with  reference  to  the  iden- 
tity of  the  person  who  made  the 
marks."  Matter  of  Hopkins  (1902), 
172  N.  Y.  369,  65  N.  E.  173. 
Expert  Testimony  Regarding 
Erasure  on  Document. 

"The  next  question  objected  to  by 
the  defendant's  counsel  was,  whether 
there  appeared  to  be  an  erasure  upon 
the  note.  The  observations  already 
made  apply  with  some  force  to  the 
question  now  under  consideration  .  .  . 
The  party  assailing  the  note  as  forged 
or  counterfeited  has  the  right  to  have 
a  description  of  it  incorporated  in  the 
record,  so  that  the  court  of  review, 
which  does  not  usually  have  the  orig- 
inal paper  before  it,  may  be  informed 
as  correctly  as  possible  in  regard  to 
its  appearance  .  .  .  Hence  a  witness 
with  a  paper  before  him  may  be  asked 
as  to  the  condition  and  appearance 
of  the  paper,  and  such  facts  are  not 
opinions."  Dubois  v.  Baker  (1&64), 
30  N.  Y.  355;  Hadcock  v.  O'Rourke 
(1889),  25  N.  Y.  S.  R.  55,  6  N.  Y. 
Supp.  549. 


Expert  Testimony  to  Prove 
Manner  in   Which   Paper   Was 
Cut. 

"It     (manner    of    cutting)     was    de- 
scriptive of  the  note,  and  either  party 
had   a   right   to   have   a   description   of 
it    in    the    case."      Dubois     v.    Baker 
(1864),  30  N.  Y.  355. 
Expert  Testimony  Regarding 
Crowded  Appearance  or  Size  of 
Writing. 

"The  object  was  to  show  that  the 
note  was  not  written  in  the  defend- 
ant's usual  manner,  but  the  letters 
were  smaller  and  more  crowded;  the 
plaintiffs  thereby  intending  to  satisfy 
the  jury  that  the  note  was  written 
over  a  signature  of  the  intestate  and 
was  not  a  note  signed  by  him  .  .  . 
It  was  competent  to  prove  this  fact." 
Dubois  v.  Baker  (1864),  30  N.  Y. 
355,  64  L.  R.  A.  309. 

Proof  of  Seal 
by  Comparison. 

"If  the  impression  of  a  seal  were  in 
controversy,   it   would    surely    be   com- 
petent  to    show   by   other   impressions 
from  the  same  sealing  instrument  that 
the    impression    was    invariably    char- 
acterized by  a  particular  mark  or  de- 
fect."   People  v.  Storrs,  207  N.  Y.  147. 
Expert   Testimony   Admitted   to 
Assist   in   Deciphering   Obscure 
Handwriting. 

"A  dispute  thereupon  arose  whether 
the  date  of  the  receipt  was  January 
or  July  (1881)  .  .  .  The  defendant 
called  an  expert  to  show  that  the  date 


of  the  receipt  was  'January'  and  not 
'July'  ...  If  such  comparison  may 
be  made  by  unskilled  jurymen,  why 
should  they  not  be  aided  and  en- 
lightened, as  they  may  be  in  analog- 
ous cases  of  the  genuineness  of  hand- 
writing, alterations,  and  simulations 
by  men  who  have  made  the  subject  of 
handwriting  a  study  and  have  obtained 
skill  and  proficiency  in  that  branch 
of  knowledge."  Dressier  v.  Hard 
(1891),  127  N.  Y.  235,  27  N.  E.  823. 

Proof   of   Ancient   Documents. 

Miles  v.  Loomis,  75  N.  Y.  288;  Re 
Burbank,  104  App.  Div.  312,  93  N.  Y. 
Supp.  866,  185  N.  Y.  559,  7  N.  E. 
1183. 

Admissibility   of  Guided   Hand 
or  Assisted  Writing. 

"The  witness  heard  the  testator 
asked  whether  'he  desired  Mr.  O'Reilly 
to  assist  him  in  writing  his  name,  and 
the  testator  answered  yes,  whereupon 
Mr.  O'Reilly  took  the  testator's  hand 
and  guided  it  ...  The  question 
whether  the  signature  is  the  act  of 
the  testator  does  not  turn  upon  the 
extent  of  the  aid,  but  whether  the  aid 
was  assistance  or  control  ...  so  long 
as  there  was  the  conscious  wish  of  the 
testator  that  his  hand  should  make 
the  signature,  and  he  participated  in 
any  degree  in  the  making  of  it  and 
acquiesced  in  and  adopted  the  signa- 
ture thus  made,  it  was  sufficient." 
In  re  Kearney's  Will,  74  N.  Y.  Supp. 
1045. 


(i)  QUESTIONS  REGARDING  PROCEDURE. 


Proof  of  "Other  Forgeries." 

"Generally  speaking,  evidence  of 
other  crimes  is  competent  to  prove  the 
specific  crime  charged  when  it  tends 
to  establish  (1)  motive;  (2)  intent; 
(3)  the  absence  of  mistake  or  acci- 
dent; (4)  a  common  scheme  or  plan 
embracing  the  commission  of  two  or 
more  crimes  so  related  to  each  other 
that  proof  of  one  tends  to  establish 
the  others;  (5)  the  identity  of  the 
person  charged  with  the  commission 
of  the  crime  on  trial."  People  v. 
Molineux,  168  N.  Y.  322. 

"In  cases  of  alleged  forgery  of 
checks,  etc.,  evidence  is  admissible  to 
show  that  at  or  near  the  same  time 
that  the  instrument  described  in  the 


indictment  was   forged  or  uttered   the 
defendant   had    passed,   or   had   in    his 
possession,  similar  forged  instruments, 
as   it  tends  to   prove   intent."     People 
v.  Molineux,   pp.   297-298. 
Proving  Handwriting  Under 
"Article  829." 

Testimony  as  to  "handwriting  of  de- 
cedent, under  Article  829  of  Code  of 
Civil  Procedure,  excluding  testimony 
regarding  transactions  with  decedent, 
164  N.  Y.  234,  58  N.  E.  118;  Boyd  v. 
Boyd,  21  N.  Y.  App.  Div.  361,  47  N.  Y. 
Supp.  522;  Dolan  v.  Leary  (Supm.  Ct. 
Spec.  T.)  68  N.  Y.  Supp.  91;  Wilber 
v.  Gillespie,  127  App.  Div.  611;  Hussey 
v.  Kirkman,  95  K  Y.  63  (testimony 
admitted.) 


Jury  May  Make  Comparisons.  statutes,  may  be  made   by  witnesses, 

"It  may  be  added  that  comparisons  or  by  the  court,  or  jury   without  the 

with     standards     produced     in     court,  aid  of  witnesses."     People  v.  Molineux, 

whether  at  common  law  or  under  the  p.  330. 


(j)  REVIEW  OF  FACTS 
Appellate  Division  of  the 
Supreme  Court,   State  of  New 
York,  Has  Power  to  Review 
Facts. 

"We  have  a  right  to  do  this,  be- 
cause we  sit  more  as  a  trial  court 
upon  the  facts  than  as  a  court  of  re- 
view (Code  Civ.  Prac.,  Sec.  2586). 
The  section  of  the  Code  just  cited 
provides  that  where  an  appeal  is  taken 
from  a  decree  of  a  Surrogate  Court, 
upon  the  facts,  the  Appellate  Court 
has  the  same  power  to  decide  the 
questions  of  fact  which  the  Surrogate 
had  and  it  may,  in  its  discretion,  re- 
ceive further  testimony  or  documen- 
tary evidence  and  appoint  a  referee." 
Matter  of  Rice  (1903),  81  App.  Div. 
223,  81  N.  Y.  Supp.  68. 
Reversal  on  the  Facts  by 
Appellate  Court  of  Verdict 
of  Jury. 

"Not    alone    does    the    great    prepon- 


BY  APPELLATE  COURT. 

derance  of  the  expert  testimony  offered 
upon  the  trial  establish  the  spurious- 
ness  of  the  instrument,  but  a  mere 
comparison  of  the  signatures  upon  the 
instrument  with  the  genuine  signa- 
tures of  Cyrenius  C.  Townsend,  his 
wife,  and  of  plaintiff's  mother,  clearly 
demonstrates,  even  to  the  layman, 
that  the  former  are  but  clumsy 
forgeries."  Townsend  v.  Perry  (1917), 
6  A.  L,  R.  524,  177  App.  Div.  415, 
164  N.  Y.  Supp.  441. 

"He  testified  on  the  trial  that  he 
did  not  sign  the  said  alleged  confes- 
sion, but  his  signatures  to  the  com- 
plaint herein,  to  the  bail  bond  before 
the  magistrate,  and  made  twice  dur- 
ing the  trial  herein  at  the  request  of 
counsel,  show  positively  that  he  did. 
If  the  jury  found  otherwise,  the  ver- 
dict would  have  been  set  aside  .  .  ." 
Georgio  v.  Batterman  (1909),  134 
App.  Div.  139. 


(k)  HANDWRITING  AND  DISPUTED  DOCUMENT  QUESTIONS. 


Significance  of  Identity  or  Close 
Similarity  as  Indicating  Forgery 
by  Tracing. 

"It  clearly  and  conclusively  appears, 
as  it  seems  to  us,  that  the  alleged  will 
of  1900  was  not  the  will  of  William 
M.  Rice,  deceased;  that  the  signa- 
tures on  that  will  are  not  his  genuine 
signatures;  that  the  same  are  simply 
tracings  made  from  a  genuine  signa- 
ture .  .  .  The  name  of  William  M. 
Rice  (W.  M.  Rice)  appears  four  times 
upon  the  alleged  will  of  1900,  and 
upon  a  critical  examination  of  these 
four  signatures  it  will  be  found  that 
they  correspond  almost  exactly  —  a 
coincidence  which  could  not  possibly 
happen  in  the  case  of  four  genuine 
signatures  of  a  person  upwards  of 
eighty  years  of  age  ...  In  other 
words  each  signature  will  superim- 
pose the  other,  a  similarity  which 
does  not  appear  in  the  concededly 
genuine  signatures  introduced  in  evi- 
dence, and  which  from  the  very  na- 
ture of  things  could  not  occurr."  Mat- 
ter of  Rice  (1903),  81  App.  Div.  223. 

".  .  .  The  signatures  made  in  ordi- 
nary transactions,  written  without 


such  studied  and  careful  intention,  are 
never  counterparts  one  of  another  .  .  . 
But  where  two  or  more  supposed 
signatures  are  found  to  be  counter- 
parts I  think  the  simulation  is  de- 
tected by  that  circumstance."  Hunt 
v.  Lawless,  1  Abb.  N.  Cas.  (N.  Y.) 
113. 

Alteration  by  Stranger  or 
Third  Party  Does  Not 
Invalidate  Instrument. 

Martin  v.  The  Tradesmen's  Insur- 
ance Co.,  101  N.  Y.  498,  5  N.  E.  338. 

General  Appearance  (What  is 
Mainly  Line  Quality  as  Affected 
by  Skill,  Pen-position,  and 
Speed)  May  Strongly  Indicate 
Lack  of  Genuineness. 

"There  is  a  dash  and  swing  about 
the  stroke  which  evidences  a  quick 
and  confident  penman,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  signature  to  the  will, 
although  it  simulates  the  standards, 
the  strokes  appear  to  be  labored  and 
lacking  the  clean-cut  appearance  of 
the  true  signatures."  Matter  of  Al- 
binger,  30  Misc.  187,  63  N.  Y.  Supp. 
744. 


person  may  write  poorly  at  time 
rhen  his  signature  does  not  resemble 
ris  usual  style  of  writing,  perhaps, 
but  there  is  a  built-up,  mechanical 
appearance  of  this  disputed  signature 
which  even  a  mast  liberal  considera- 
tion cannot  disregard."  Matter  of 
Burtis,  43  Misc.  437,  89  N.  Y.  Supp. 
441. 

Six  Alleged  Eye  Witnesses 
Against  Opinion  and  Expert 
Testimony. 

"Several    business     men     who     were 
familiar    with    the    handwriting    .    .    . 


testified  that  in  their  opinion  the 
signature  to  the  instrument  in  ques- 
tion was  not  genuine;  and  there  was 
also  opinion  evidence  from  a  hand- 
writing expert  to  the  same  effect. 

"On  the  other  hand  the  defendant 
.  .  .  produced  at  least  six  (6)  wit- 
nesses who  testified  to  having  seen 
Mr.  Smith  sign  the  document. 

".  .  .  The  defendant  has  been  con- 
victed of  the  'Crime  of  forgery  in  the 
second  degree."  People  v.  Storrs 
(1912),  207  N.  Y.  147,  100  N.  E.  730. 


(1)  EXCERPTS  FROM  LATE  DECISIONS  FROM  OTHER  STATES. 


Testimony  of  Attesting  Wit- 
nesses Overcome  By  Any 
Competent  Evidence. 

"The  will  was  attacked  on  the 
ground  that  the  signature  to  it  was 
not  the  genuine  signature  of  Mary  A. 
Baird,  but  a  mere  forgery.  A  special 
question  of  fact  was  propounded  to 
and  answered  by  the  jury  which  had 
been  called  to  assist  the  court: 

'Did  Mary  R.  Baird,  now  decesaed. 
sign  the  instrument  .  .  .  Answer:  No.' 

There  were  three  witnesses  to  the 
will,  and  they  all  testified  positively 
that  Mary  A.  Baird  had  signed  the 
will  in  their  presence,  and  that  they 
signed  it  as  witnesses  at  her  request, 
in  her  presence,  and  in  the  presence 
of  each  other. 

Defendants'  first  'contention  ...  It 
is  also  our  contention  that  the  posi- 
tive testimony  of  the  three  subscrib- 
ing witnesses  cannot  be  overthrown  by 
mere  opinion  evidence  in  the  absence 
of  evidence  tending  to  show  corruption 
or  dishonesty  on  the  part  of  such 
attesting  witnesses.' 

[1]  The  testimony  of  attesting  wit- 
ness to  a  will  may  be  overcome  by  any 
competent  evidence.  .  .  Such  evidence 
may  be  direct,  or  it  may  be  circum- 
stantial; and  expert^  and  opinion  evi- 
dence is  just  as  competent  as  any 
other  evidence.  Indeed,  where  the 
signature  to  a  will  is  a  forgery,  and 
where  the  attesting,  witnesses  have  the 
hardihood  to  commit  perjury,  it  is 
difficult  to  see  how  the  bogus  will  can 
be  overthrown  except  by  expert  and 
competent  opinion  evidence  tending  to 
show  that  the  pretended  signature  is 
not  that  of  the  testator,  but  spurious. 


The  rule  contended  for  by  appellants 
would  frequently  baffle  justice  and 
give  judicial  countenance  to  many  a 
high-handed  fraud."  Baird  v.  Shaffer, 
Kansas  Supreme  Court  (1917),  168 
Pacific  836. 

Illustrated  and  Reasoned  Testi- 
mony of  Expert  Not  Merely 
Opinion  Evidence. 

".  .  .  But  the  error  in  the  conclu- 
sion arrived  at  upon  the  first  hearing 
consisted  in  treating  the  testimony  of 
the  .  .  .  expert  on  handwriting,  as 
merely  opinion  evidence. 

It  was  something  more  than  the 
mere  opinion  of  the  witness.  It  was 
a  detailed  statement  of  facts  .  .  .; 
facts  which  were  revealed  .by  the  use 
of  mechanical  instruments  and  scien- 
tifically established  to  the  degree  ot 
demonstration.  These  facts  we  deem 
to  be  wholly  irreconcilable  with  the 
evidence  of  witnesses  who  testified  to 
the  genuineness  of  W.  T.  Boyd's  sig- 
nature, which  testimony,  although 
apparently  credible,  is  not  by  any 
means  indubitable  when  considered  in 
the  light  of  the  facts  established  by 
the  scientific  investigations  of  the 
expert  on  handwriting.  .  .  It  was  said 
in  Gordon's  Case,  50  N.  J.  Eq.  397, 
26  Atl.  268: 

'Handwriting  is  an  art  concerning 
which  correctness  of  opinion  is  sus- 
ceptible of  demonstration.' 

The  learned  judge  writing  the  opinion 
said : 

'I  am  fully  convinced  that  the  value 
of  the  opinion  of  every  handwriting 
expert  as  evidence  must  depend  upon 
the  clearness  with  which  the  expert 
demonstrates  its  correctness.' 


The  demonstration,  when  the  signa- 
ture of  a  person  since  deceased  is 
attacked  as  a  forgery,  consists,  as  in 
this  case,  of  an  accumulation  of  a 
great  mass  of  facts.  .  .  All  these 
facts,  when  established,  may  confirm 
the  testimony  of  apparently  credible 
witnesses  who  testify  to  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  questioned  signatures,  or 
establish  to  the  degree  of  demonstra- 
tion the  falsity  of  it.  .  .  'Preponder- 
ance of  the  evidence'  is  a  phrase 
which  in  .its  last  analysis  means 
probability  of  its  truth.  In  a  cause 
where  there  is  conflicting  moral  evi- 
dence, the  jury  in  the  one  case,  the 
chancellor  in  the  other,  is  required  to 
decide  accordingly  as  the  weight  of  the 
evidence  preponderates  in  favor  of  one 
proposition  or  the  other.  That  is  to 
say,  having  no  personal  knowledge  of 
the  transaction  under  investigation, 
they  must  by  the  application  of 
common  knowledge  and  experience 
decide  which  set  of  witnesses  or  line 
of  evidence  raises  the  greater  proba- 
bility of  its  consistency  with  truth. 

In  the  use  of  demonstrative  evi- 
ence  one  relies  upon  the  evidence  of 
his  own  senses.  It  is  therefore  evi- 
dence of  the  highest  rank.  It  is  the 
ultimate  test  of  truth.  To  this  class 
belongs  mathematics,  because  a  pro- 
position in  mathematics  may  be  estab- 
lished by  the  evidence  of  one's  own 
senses.  Moral  evidence  depends  for  its 
value  upon  veracity  on  the  one  hand 
and  credulity  upon  the  other;  so  in 
testing  the  truth  of  a  witness'  state- 
ment one  must  therefore  draw  upon 
his  fund  of  common  knowledge  and 
experience  of  men  and  affairs,  if,  like 
a  prudent  man  who  'looketh  well  to 
his  going,"  he  would  decide  in  accord- 
ance with  that  which  seems  most  prob- 
able. 

In  the  case  at  bar  we  have  the  un- 
contradicted  evidence  of  the  expert 
on  handwriting.  The  questioned  sig- 
natures and  photographs  of  them  are 
before  the  court,  as  well  as  signatures 
admittedly  genuine  and  photographs 
of  them,  some  enlarged  for  convenience 
of  comparison;  and  the  means  were 
at  hand  for  measurements  and  other 
comparisons  embracing  the  whole  field 
of  examination.  So  that  the  facts  to 
which  the  expert  witness  testified 
concerning  the  characteristics  and  con- 


struction of  the  signatures  are  matters 
within  the  field  of  demonstrative  evi- 
dence. These  facts,  being  established 
by  evidence  of  the  first  rank,  are 
strongly  presumptive  of  the  further 
fact  that  the  signatures  in  question 
are  tracings  or  drawings  by  a  hand 
other  than  the  person  whose  signa- 
tures they  purport  to  be.  .  .  Like- 
wise the  testimony  of  others  who 
claimed  to  be  eyewitnesses  contains 
highly  improbable  statements,  and  just 
in  the  degree  that  such  testimony  is 
inherently  improbably  as  measured  by 
the  test  of  common  knowledge  and 
experience,  the  probability  that  the 
questioned  signatures  are  forgeries  in- 
creases. In  this  view  of  the  evidence 
we  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  decree 
of  December  #7,  1916,  was  erroneous; 
that  it  was  manifestly  against  the 
weight  of  the  evidence  and  clearly 
erroneous. 

So  the  decree  is  reversed."  Boyd  v. 
Gosser,  Florida  Supreme  Court  (1919), 
82  Southern  758. 

"Silent  Circumstances"  May 
Speak  as  Convincingly  as 
Animated  Witnesses. 

"If  the  subscribing  witnesses  told 
the  truth  the  will  offered  for  probate 
was  executed  in  the  manner  outlined. 
[In  opposition]  He  [the  expert  witness] 
had  examined  the  handwriting  of  dece- 
dent and  his  genuine  signature,  includ- 
ing checks,  letters,  and  other  instru- 
ments, his  purported  signature  on  the 
will,  and  had  compared  accepted  stand- 
ards with  the  disputed  writing  and  ex- 
pressed the  opinion  that  the  latter  was 
a  forgery.  .  .  His  testimony  answers 
for  itself  and  gives  its  own  reasons 
for  the  light  it  throws  on  the  issue 
of  forgery. 

[1,  2]   An  eminent  author  writes: 

'The  real  expert,  .  .  .  when  guided 
and  assisted  by  the  competent  lawyer, 
will  make  the  facts  themselves  testify 
and  stand  as  silent,  but  convincing 
witnesses  pointing  the  way  to  truth 
and  justice.'  Osborn,  Questioned 
Documents,  p.  xxiii. 

Of  this  author's  work,  Wigmore 
says: 

'The  feature  of  Mr.  Osborn's  book 
which  will  perhaps  mark  its  most  pro- 
gressive aspect  is  its  insistence  upon 
the  reasons  for  an  opinion,  not  the 
bare  opinion  alone.'  L.  R.  A.  1918D, 


647    (Baird   v.   Shaffer,    101   Kan.    585, 
168  Pac.  836).  .  . 

[4,  5]  Testimony  of  handwriting  ex- 
perts that  a  will  is  a  forgery  has  been 
held  sufficient  to  overturn  oral  testi- 
mony of  subscribing  witnesses  that 
the  will  was  duly  executed.  Weber 
v.  Strobel  (Mo.),  194  S.  W.  272;  Baird 
v.  Shaffer,  101  Kan.  585,  168  Pac.  836, 
L.  R.  A.  1918D,  638.  .  . 

[6,  7]  The  two  subscribing  witnesses 
who  testified  on  behalf  of  proponents 
that  the  will  was  duly  executed  were 
not  directly  impeached  or  directly  con- 
tradicted by  other  witnesses,  and  for 
that  reason  the  trial  court,  in  reach- 
ing the  conclusion  that  the  will  is 
genuine,  indulged  the  presumption  that 
they  told  the  truth.  This  presumption, 
after  there  had  been  credible  proof  of 
the  forgery  charged  by  contestants, 
was  entertained  throughout  the  re- 
mainder of  the  trial  below  and  in- 
heres in  t/he  judgment,  as  shown  by 
the  opinion  of  the  trial  court.  After 
the  evidence  of  forgery  had  been  ad- 
duced the  entertaining  of  such  a  pre 
sumption  was  a  serious  error.  In  a 
civil  case,  when  there  is  substantial 
proof  in  support  of  the  plea  that  the 
will  offered  for  probate  is  a  forgery, 
all  presumptions  in  favor  of  genuine 
ness  fall.  Thereafter  the  truth  must 
be  found  in  the  evidence  itself,  and 
every  item  of  proof  must  stand  on  its 


own  footing  in  connection  with  each 
evidential  fact  considered  in  its  proper 
light.  In  this  test  presumption  creates 
no  advantage  one  way  or  the  other. 
In  such  a  situation  persons  who  de- 
clare themselves  to  be  subscribing  wit- 
nesses and  boldly  speak  from  the  wit- 
ness stand  as  such,  though  not  directly 
impeached,  are  subject  to  the  same 
impartial  and  penetrating  scrutiny  as 
the  mute  instrument  ascribed  by  them 
to  the  deed. 

In  the  unbiased  search  for  the 
truth  the  law  has  no  favorites  by  pre- 
sumption. Silent  circumstances,  with- 
out power  to  change  their  attitude,  or 
to  make  explanations,  or  to  commit 
perjury,  may  speak  as  truthfully  in 
court  as  animated  witnesses.  .  .  If 
the  truth  is  found  in  oral  testimony, 
it  must  determine  the  issue,  but  it  is 
equally  potent  if  found  in  circum- 
stances. .  . 

[9,  10]  The  evidence  as  a  whole 
shows  that  the  will  is  a  forgery,  that 
the  judgment  of  the  county  court 
denying  the  probate  is  free  from  error, 
and  that  the  judgment  of  the  district 
court  sustaining  the  will  is  clearly 
wrong. 

Reversed,  and  judgment  of  county 
court  affirmed."  In  re  O'Connor's 
Estate,  Nebraska  Supreme  Court 
(1920),  179  N.  W.  401. 


A  CASE  IN  COURT  467 

in  case  of  appeal,  when  the  printed  record  alone  must 
be  depended  upon,  and  also  that  the  jury  may  know  at 
the  time  testimony  is  given  what  preparation  and 
experience  the  witness  has  had  that  may  give  weight  to 
his  testimony,  or,  on  the  contrary,  show  how  meagre  his 
qualifications  may  be  for  giving  an  opinion  on  the 
subject  in  dispute. 

After  the  witness  is  shown  to  be  qualified  he  is  asked 
if  he  has  made  a  comparison  of  the  disputed  and 
standard  writings  in  the  case  or  examined  the  matter  in 
dispute.  Upon  saying  that  he  has,  he  is  then  asked  if 
he  has  reached  a  conclusion  as  to  the  matter  in  dispute 
and  if  so  what  that  conclusion  is.  Following  this  some- 
what formal  series  of  questions  which  bring  out  the 
essential  facts,  the  witness  should  be  requested  to  give, 
and  should  be  afforded  ample  opportunity  to  explain, 
the  reasons  and  basis  for  the  opinion  given1. 

This  latter  is  the  really  important  function  of  the 

JIt  may  be  stated  as  a  general  rule  that  the  value  of  opinions  given 
by  experts  depends  upon  the  experience  and  knowledge  which  they 
have  and  evince  concerning  the  matters  about  which  they  testify  and 
the  reasons  which  they  assign  for  it. — Cyclopedia  of  Law  and  Pro- 
cedure, Vol.  XVII,  p.  268  (17  Cyc.). 

Handwriting  is  an  art  concerning  which  correctness  of  opinion  is 
susceptible  of  demonstration  and  I  am  fully  convinced  that  the  value 
of  the  opinion  of  every  handwriting  expert  as  evidence  must  depend 
upon  the  clearness  with  which  the  expert  demonstrates  its  correct- 
ness. .  .  .  The  appearance  or  lack  of  one  characteristic  may  be 
accounted  to  coincidence  or  accident  but,  as  the  number  increases,  the 
probability  of  coincidence  or  accident  will  disappear,  until  conviction 
will  become  irresistible. — Gordon's  case,  50  N.  J.  Eq.  397,  26  Atl. 
268  (1893). 

The  evidence  of  experts  is  neither  intrinsically  weak,  nor  in- 
trinsically strong;  its  value  depends  upon  the  character,  capacity,  skill, 
opportunities  of  observation,  the  state  of  mind  of  the  expert  himself 
and  on  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  of  its  weight  and  worth  the  jury 
must  judge  without  any  influencing  instruction,  either  weakening  or 
strengthening  from  the  court. — Coleman  vs.  Adair,  75  Miss.  660  (1898). 

And  in  Collier  vs.  Simpson,  Tindal,  C.  J.,  ruled  that  counsel  might 
ask  a  witness,  who  was  called  to  testify  as  an  expert,  "his  judgment 


468  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

expert  witness,  especially  in  a  questioned  document  case 
where  a  tangible  thing  is  actually  before  the  jury.  Just 
at  this  point  there  comes  to  the  competent  witness  who 
seeks  to  show  the  fact,  and  to  the  attorney  on  the  right 
side  of  the  case  who  has  technically  qualified  himself, 
the  opportunity  to  assist  the  jury  in  reaching  a  correct 
conclusion  as  to  the  matter  in  dispute. 

The  primary  purpose  and  function  of  questioned 
document  expert  testimony  is  not  to  foist  a  ready-made 
opinion  on  court  and  jury,  but  to  assist  the  jury  in 
reaching  a  correct  interpretation  of  the  facts  before 
them.  The  importance  of  the  bare  opinion  given  by  the 
witness  should  be  constantly  minimized  and  the  reasons 
for  the  opinion  should  be  elaborated  and  emphasized. 
Naturally  those  arrayed  against  the  facts  strenuously 
object  to  this  part  of  effective  testimony  even  to  the 
extent  of  arguing  that  all  reasons  for  opinions  must  be 
brought  out  on  cross-examination.  It  is  easy  to  under- 
stand how  brief,  under  such  circumstances,  a  cross- 
examination  of  an  intelligent  and  effective  witness 
would  be.  When  such  testimony  is  hampered  and 

and  the  grounds  of  it."  The  value  of  an  opinion  may  be  much  in- 
creased or  diminished,  in  the  estimate  of  the  jury,  by  the  reasons  given 
for  it. — Keith  vs.  Lothrop,  10  Gush.  (Mass.)  457  (1852). 

Appellant  then  proposed,  by  further  questions,  to  have  each  of 
these  witnesses  state  the  grounds  upon  which  this  opinion  was  based, 
and  to  point  out  and  explain  to  the  jury  the  differences  which  they 
detected  and  which  induced  this  belief  on  their  part.  An  objection 
on  the  part  of  counsel  for  appellee  to  this  line  of  interrogation  was 
sustained  by  the  court. 

The  value  of  an  opinion  may  be  much  increased  or  diminished 
in  the  estimate  of  the  jury,  by  the  reasons  given  for  it  (Keith  vs. 
Lothrop,  10  Gush.  (Mass.)  457). 

The  closing  sentence  of  this  quotation  from  the  Massachusetts 
case  seems  to  us  to  suggest  a  most  potent  reason  in  favor  of  the 
admissibility  of  such  evidence.  To  withhold  it  from  the  jury  would 
be  to  deprive  them,  to  a  large  extent,  of  the  very  facts  best  calculated 
to  enable  them  intelligently  to  weigh  and  determine  the  value  of  the 
opinion  expressed. — Kendall's  Ex.  vs.  Collier,  79  Ky.  446  (1895). 


A  CASE  IN  COURT  469 

restricted  it  is  always  to  the  advantage  of  the  party  who 
is  seeking  to  distort  or  hide  the  truth.  Two  mere 
opinions  in  conflict  may  neutralize  each  other,  but  this 
is  not  usually  true  of  two  reasons. 

This  reason-giving  part  of  expert  testimony  should 
not  be  an  unbroken  monologue  by  the  witness  nor,  what 
is  worse,  should  it  be  a  succession  of  assents  by  the 
witness  to  testimony  which  is  really  given  by  counsel  in 
the  form  of  a  series  of  long,  technical  questions.  Either 
of  these  methods  is  tiresome  and  ineffective.  Counsel 
should  have  a  series  of  questions  prepared  that  will 
bring  out  in  proper  order  the  main  points  of  the  testi- 
mony and  should  also  be  prepared  to  ask  for  explana- 
tions or  repetitions  when  they  are  necessary.  Salient 
points  can  be  greatly  enforced  by  well-timed  and 
correctly  phrased  inquiries.  At  this  juncture  a  thorough 
and  ready  knowledge  of  subjects  under  discussion  is  of 
great  value  to  a  lawyer.  If  thus  qualified  he,  as  well  as 
the  witness,  can  put  just  the  shade  of  emphasis  on  a 
statement  that  it  requires  and  with  the  assistance  of  an 
intelligent  witness  can  actually  lead  the  minds  of  jury- 
men from  ignorance  to  knowledge,  from  doubt  to  belief1. 

In  a  handwriting  case  of  importance,  where  the  jury 
must  make  a  careful  study  and  comparison  of  the  writing 

JIt  is  then  a  duty  resting  upon  the  legal  profession  to  remove  the 
public  suspicion  directed  against  this  species  of  evidence  by  removing 
its  cause,  and  this  can  only  be  done  by  a  higher  standard  of  profes- 
sional ability  and  ethics  in  this  field.  A  knowledge  of  the  detailed  rules 
governing  expert  testimony,  the  nature  of  this  species  of  evidence  and 
its  relation  to  the  judicial  investigation,  the  general  principles  of  the 
sciences  most  frequently  appealed  to  in  judicial  proceedings,  such  as 
medicine  and  handwriting,  in  their  legal  aspects,  should  be  as  requisite 
to  a  legal  education  as  a  knowledge  of  contracts  or  real  estate.  These 
subjects  should  be  taught  in  the  law  schools  and  should  be  require- 
ments for  admission  to  the  Bar. — The  Law  of  Expert  Testimony  and 
the  Proposed  Changes  Therein,  Edward  Lindsey,  LL.  B.;  the  "Legal 
Intelligencer,"  Dec.  5,  1902. 


470  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

in  question,  duplicate  photographs  of  the  disputed 
writing  and  the  same  number  of  photographs  of  at  least 
part  of  the  standards  should  be  provided.  If  there  are 
many  different  photographs  they  may  be  mounted  in 
photograph  books  made  for  such  purpose,  but  it  is 
generally  better  and  more  convenient  to  have  them 
backed  and  hinged  as  is  suggested  in  the  chapter  on 
photography,  and  then  numbered  or  lettered  in  regular 
order. 

In  some  cases  it  is  desirable  to  bind  all  photographs 
together  in  detachable  covers  and  have  an  extra  photo- 
graph of  the  disputed  writing  separate  from  the  others 
so  that  it  may  be  more  readily  compared  with  any  of  the 
other  photographs.  Under  some  conditions  it  is  desir- 
able to  mark  plainly  all  photographs  of  standard 
writings  in  ink  of  one  color  and  the  photographs  of  the 
disputed  writings  in  ink  of  a  different  color.  All  details 
should  be  arranged  so  that  there  will  be  no  confusion, 
no  opportunity  for  misunderstanding  and  no  loss  of 
time.  Each  juryman's  set  of  exhibits,  when  there  are 
several  separate  photographs  not  bound  together,  should 
be  inclosed  in  a  strong  envelope  or  other  suitable 
receptacle. 

In  some  cases  only  one  set  of  photographs  are  neces- 
sary but  where  the  question  is  one  mainly  of  handwriting 
an  ample  number  should  be  provided.  Sixteen  complete 
sets  of  photographs  allow  one  set  for  each  juryman,  one 
set  for  the  court,  one  set  for  the  witness  and  one  set 
each  for  the  opposing  attorneys.  In  case  one  set  for 
every  two  jurymen  is  provided  only  ten  sets  in  all  are 
required. 

It  is  not  usually  necessary  to  mark  all  the  sets  of 


A  CASE  IX  COURT  471 

photographs  in  evidence.  It  is  customary  to  mark  one 
complete  set  as  regular  exhibits  and  the  others  are 
proved  and  used  as  duplicates.  In  some  instances 
photographs  are  simply  used  as  illustrations,  exactly  as 
a  chart  or  blackboard  would  be  used,  and  under  such 
conditions  are  only  marked  for  identification1. 

Photographs  may  be  admitted  without  objection  but  it 
is  usually  necessary  to  prove  them.  This  is  done  by  the 
one  testifying  who  made  them  that  he  made  them  and 
that  they  are  "correct."  The  witness  tells  what  the 
photograph  is  made  from,  whether  it  is  smaller,  the 
same  size  or  larger  than  the  original  and  how  much  if 
at  all  it  differs  in  size.  Three  or  four  questions  are 
usually  sufficient  to  prove  ordinary  photographs. 

If  photographs  are  unusual  in  any  way  then  the 
process  of  making  them  should  be  described  in  detail. 
A  photograph  is  considered  to  have  been  made  by  one 
technically  qualified  to  do  such  work  who  can  testify 
that  it  was  properly  arranged  in  position  before  the 
camera,  accurately  focused,  and  then  given  the  proper 
time  of  exposure.  It  is  not  essential  that  the  plate  be 
developed  by  the  one  who  proves  the  photograph  or  that 
the  prints  should  be  actually  printed  from  the  negative 
by  him,  if  he  has  inspected  the  negative  to  see  that  it  is 
an  accurate  reproduction  of  the  original,  and  inspected 
the  prints  to  see  that  they  are  accurate  impressions  of 
the  negative.  Photographs  are  sometimes  admitted  on 


JThe  next  objection  was  that  an  expert  witness  was  allowed  to 
explain  upon  a  blackboard  his  meaning  and  the  reason  for  his  opinion. 
We  think  there  was  no  error  in  this.  Of  course  the  whole  class 
of  expert  evidence  is  exceptional.  And  as  experts  are  to  give  opinions, 
it  is  right  that  they  should  explain  the  reasons  for  them. — McKay  vs. 
Lasher,  19  N.  Y.  S.  Rep.  816  (1888).  Followed  in  Dryer  vs.  Brown, 
52  Hun,  327  (1889). 


472  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

the  evidence  of  those  who  did  not  make  them  if  it  is 
shown  that  they  are  accurate  reproductions  of  the 
original. 

When  photographic  illustrations  are  provided  and  are 
in  the  hands  of  the  jury  it  may  not  be  necessary  to  use 
a  blackboard  or  chart,  although  in  important  and  difficult 
cases  it  often  saves  considerable  time  and  strengthens 
testimony  somewhat  to  make  a  few  general  illustrations 
as  testimony  is  being  given  that  all  may  see  and  under- 
stand at  once. 

It  is  usually  preferable  to  use  paper  rather  than  a 
blackboard  so  that  the  sheets  may  be  numbered  and 
preserved  for  cross-examination  or  future  reference. 
Cheap  white  paper,  like  that  upon  which  newspapers  are 
printed  and  about  24  by  36  inches  in  size,  is  best  for  the 
purpose.  A  soft  marking  crayon  of  large  size  should  be 
used  and  illustrations  should  be  made  large  and  distinct. 
Colored  crayons  are  sometimes  useful  for  special  illustra- 
tions. 

Where  numerous  exhibits  are  referred  to,  constant 
care  should  be  exercised  by  counsel  and  witness  that 
numbers  of  exhibits  always  be  given  or  that  papers  be 
described  so  that  the  record  of  the  case  may  be  intel- 
ligible. This  is  particularly  important  in  the  event  of 
an  appeal  of  the  case  where  the  record  of  the  testimony 
must  be  depended  upon  entirely.  Cases  have  been  lost 
on  appeal  because  important  testimony,  as  reported,  was 
mere  gibberish  and  absolutely  unintelligible.  This  was 
not  the  fault  of  the  reporter  but  of  the  witness  and  of 
counsel.  A  statement  that  "this  is  identical  with  that" 
means  nothing  whatever  on  the  record,  and  when  counsel 
savs,  "Look  at  the  exhibit  in  vour  hand  and  tell  me,  etc.," 


A  CASE  IN  COURT  473 

a  report  of  such  testimony  may  be  entirely  meaningless. 
Exhibit  marks  should  be  written  plainly  and  carefully 
and  should  always  be  given  either  in  question  or  answer 
or  both  so  that  the  testimony  as  reported  may  be  clearly 
understood  by  one  reading  it. 

Where  lay  witnesses  are  to  testify  as  to  handwriting 
in  connection  with  experts  who  will  go  into  details,  it  is 
best  usually  that  the  lay  witness  should  testify  first. 
When  writing  is  carefully  analyzed  and  reasons  and 
explanations  are  given  with  considerable  minuteness  and 
such  testimony  is  given  in  advance  of  the  testimony  of 
lay  witnesses  who  cannot  make  this  analysis,  the  lay 
witnesses  are  sometimes  embarrassed  and  their  testimony 
weakened  because  they  are  unable  to  enter  into  the 
matter  as  has  already  been  done.  Opinion  testimony  of 
lay  witnesses  is  usually  most  effective  and  much  less 
vulnerable  when  of  a  general  character  and  when  based 
on  general  resemblances  or  differences.  Such  testimony 
frequently  has  little  technical  value  but  may  have  much 
force  before  a  jury  especially  when  the  witness  is  well 
known1. 

Practical  questioned  document  investigation  has  two 
phases,  the  discovery  of  the  fact  and  the  proving  of  it. 
It  avails  but  little  to  discover  that  a  document  is  a 
forgery,  or  to  reach  a  conclusion  that  a  suspected  docu- 
ment is  genuine,  if  finally  the  fact  cannot  be  presented 
to  those  who  are  legally  to  decide  the  matter  so  that  they 
too  will  reach  a  correct  conclusion.  But  little  is  accom- 


aThe  impressions  of  the  immediate  friends  of  Morris  are  strongly 
against  the  genuineness  of  the  disputed  signatures.  Usually  such  im- 
pressions are  more  reliable  than  the  reasons  given  for  them,  and  in 
ordinary  cases  they  are  valuable. — Matteson  vs.  Morris,  40  Mich.  57 
(1879). 


474  QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 

plished  if  only  the  investigator  sees  and  understands 
what  he  finds  out;  a  bare  opinion  is  not  worth  much  in 
any  court.  Nor  is  an  opinion  worth  much  backed  up  by 
fantastic,  hazy,  expert  theories  that  do  not  appeal  to 
sensible  men.  The  best  reasons  for  an  opinion  are  good, 
clear  illustrations  that  appeal  to  the  intelligence  through 
the  sense  of  sight. 

Appropriate  illustrations  enable  court  and  jury  to  see 
for  themselves  and  understand  that  upon  which  a  judg- 
ment must  be  based.  Naturally  those  arrayed  against 
the  facts,  who  object  to  illustrations  as  well  as  to  reasons, 
would,  if  possible,  dull  the  hearing,  dim  the  vision  and 
muddle  the  understanding  of  all  those  who  are  finally 
to  pass  judgment  on  the  question  at  issue.  This  un- 
fortunate result  may  be  brought  about  in  effect  by 
throwing  around  questioned  document  testimony  such 
restrictions  that  those  who  are  to  decide  cannot  dis- 
tinguish the  good  from  the  bad. 

Much  of  the  discussion  of  conflicts  of  opinion  testi- 
mony begins  with  the  assumption  that  those  who  listen 
to  it  are  totally  unable  to  distinguish  between  a  reason- 
able opinion  and  an  unreasonable  opinion ;  it  is  assumed 
that  one  may  exactly  offset  the  other.  Would  it  not  be 
better  to  set  out  with  the  assumption  that  if  an  opinion 
cannot  be  supported  by  reasons  intelligible  to  the 
ordinary  man  then  it  will  be  given  no  weight  whatever? 

As  is  well  known  the  theory  of  expert  testimony  in 
general  is  that  in  a  trial  at  law  questions  regarding  sub- 
jects that  the  ordinary  man  knows  nothing  about  must 
be  referred  to  specialists  who  come  into  court  and  give 
opinions  which  it  is  assumed  are  based  on  knowledge  un- 
known to  the  ordinary  man  and  reached  by  a  process 


A  CASE  IN  COURT  475 

that  he  may  not  be  able  to  follow.  It  is  easy  to  under- 
stand what  little  force  testimony  strictly  in  this  class 
may  have  if  a  contrary  opinion  is  given  by  another 
witness  of  equal  standing.  Opinion  testimony  regarding 
disputed  documents  when  given  without  reasons  is  ex- 
actly of  this  class  and,  like  similar  testimony  on  other 
questions,  may  be  and  oftentimes  is  absolutely  worthless. 
It  is,  however,  not  necessarily  worthless  for  the  reason 
that  it  belongs  to  an  exceptional  class  of  testimony 
dealing  with  questions  that  in  many  cases  permit  of  a 
reasonable  and  tangible  interpretation,  not  only  within 
the  comprehension  of  a  man  of  average  intelligence,  but, 
by  means  of  illustrations,  actually  before  him  in  visible 
form. 

From  these  facts  it  follows,  therefore,  that  in  testi- 
mony regarding  the  genuineness  or  falsity  of  a  docu- 
ment the  clear  illustration  and  logical  interpretation  of 
the  physical  evidence  from  which  the  opinion  is  drawn 
is  the  vital  part  of  the  process.  This  is  the  view  of  the 
subject  now  taken  by  most  courts,  and  this  view  brushes 
aside  a  great  mass  of  discussion  in  the  decisions  and  the 
text-books  that  has  served  only  to  befog  the  whole 
question. 

Reduced  to  its  briefest  statement  the  enlightened  view 
is,  If  testimony  regarding  disputed  documents  or  any 
expert  testimony  is  reasonable  and  convincing  then  it 
will  be  so  considered.  The  giving  of  reasons  is  neces- 
sary, as  Professor  Wigmore  succinctly  and  sanely  puts 
it,  because,  "Without  such  re-enforcement  of  testimony 
the  opinion  of  experts  would  usually  involve  little  more 
than  a  counting  of  the  numbers  on  either  side." 


HANDWRITING  is  an  art  concerning 
which  correctness  of  opinion  is  suscept- 
ible of  demonstration  and  I  am  fully 
convinced  that  the  value  of  the  opinion  of  every 
handwriting  expert  as  evidence  must  depend  upon 
the  clearness  with  which  the  expert  demonstrates 
its  correctness.  .  .  Thus  comparison  is  rated  after 
the  fashion  of  circumstantial  evidence,  depending 
for  strength  upon  the  number  and  prominence  of 
the  links  in  the  chain.  Without  such  demonstra- 
tion the  opinion  of  an  expert  in  handwriting  is 
of  a  low  order  of  testimony,  for,  as  the  correct- 
ness of  his  opinion  is  susceptible  of  ocular  demon- 
stration, and  it  is  a  matter  of  common  observation 
that  an  expert's  conclusion  is  apt  to  be  influenced 
by  his  employer's  interest,  the  absence  of  demon- 
stration must  be  attributed  either  to  deficiency  in 
the  expert  or  lack  of  merit  in  his  conclusion.  It 
follows  that  the  expert  who  can  most  clearly  point 
out  will  be  most  highly  regarded  and  most  suc- 
cessful.— Gordon's  Case,  50  N.  J.  Eg,  397,  26 
Atl  268.  1893. 


FEB 


ERRORS  IN  IDENTIFICATION 
OF  HANDWRITING. 


By  ALBERT  S.  OSBORN, 


Examiner  of  Documents, 
New  York  City 


Reprinted  from  the  AMERICAN  LAW  REVIEW 
November-December,  1914 


ERRORS    IN    IDENTIFICATION    OF    HANDWRITING. 


ERRORS  IN  IDENTIFICATION  OF  HANDWRITING. 

The  necessity  for  proof  of  handwriting  in  courts  of  law 
has  greatly  increased  with  the  complications  of  modern 
civilization.  Such  proof  is  now  often  required  and  on  it 
may  depend  property,  liberty,  or  even  life.  This  charac- 
ter of  proof  may  be  a  very  simple  operation  or  it  may 
involve  a  complex  and  difficult  problem  but,  in  either  case, 
it  is  usually  disposed  of  in  the  most  superficial  and  per- 
functory manner.  The  task  as  frequently  presented  re- 
quires certain  technical  experience  and  special  knowledge, 
applied  in  a  systematic,  scientific  manner,  if  the  result  of 
the  investigation  is  to  rise  much  above  a  more  or  less  posi- 
tive guess.  Many  who  testify  on  this  important  question 
certainly  are  not  qualified  to  do  so  and  the  interests  of 
justice  are  thus  often  imperiled. 

One  of  the  final  fruits  of  knowledge  of  any  subject  is  the 
ability  to  estimate  correctly  the  difficulty  of  its  problems, 
and  the  supreme  test  of  ability  in  any  field  is  the  thorough- 
ness and  extent  of  one's  knowledge  of  all  the  possible 
sources  of  error.  Many  proverbs  are  based  upon  this  prin- 
ciple, notably  that  about  the  danger  of  a  little  knowledge, 
and  the  subject  of  disputed  handwriting  is  no  exception  to 
the  rule.  The  uninformed  novice  and  the  presumptuous 
fakir  stand  ready  to  give  prompt  and  definite  answers,  and 
apparently  with  equal  alacrity,  to  the  most  difficult  as  well 
as  to  the  simplest  problems. 

Obviously  the  subject  of  possible  sources  of  error  is  of 
vital  importance  and  should  receive  adequate  considera- 
tion in  every  document  investigation.  The  subject  de- 
serves careful  and  detailed  discussion  even  though  such 
discussion  may  be  distorted,  misconstrued  and  appealed  to 
by  those  arrayed  against  the  facts  in  the  effort  to  show 


2  48  AMERICAN  LAW  REVIEW. 

that  because  errors  are  possible  that  therefore  no  reliance 
can  be  placed  upon  any  conclusion  by  anyone  on  any  phase 
of  the  question.  Those  who  are  best  qualified  in  any  field 
are  the  ones  who  most  promptly  admit  their  own  limita- 
tions and  the  limitations  of  their  own  subject. 

The  principal  causes  of  error  in  determining  genuine- 
ness or  forgery  of  handwriting  or  in  deciding  whether  a 
particular  handwriting  was  or  was  not  written  by  a  cer- 
tain writer,  may  be  arranged  in  three  general  classes.  The 
first  class  of  errors  grows  out  of  incompetence  in  the  ob- 
server through  lack  of  ability  or  experience.  The  second 
class  is  that  in  which  the  conditions  of  the  problem  pre- 
sented or  internal  matters  may  lead  to  error,  and  the  third 
class  is  that  in  which  external  matters,  entirely  outside  of 
the  document  or  writing  itself,  may  lead  to  error. 

Errors  of  the  first  class,  or  those  which  may  result  from 
Incompetence  in  the  Observer,  are  as  follows: 

(a)  Basing  conclusion  entirely  upon  general  appear- 
ance or  upon  "general  character "  of  handwriting  as  a 
whole,  (b)  basing  conclusion  on  forms  of  letters  alone,  (c) 
mistaking  general  characteristics  of  writing  for  individual 
characteristics  and  basing  conclusion  thereon,  (d)  mistak- 
ing system  features  of  writing  for  individual  character- 
istics and  basing  conclusion  thereon,  (e)  mistaking  ele- 
ments or  features  indicating  nationality  of  writer  for  indi- 
vidual characteristics,  (f)  basing  conclusion  on  accidental 
or  insignificant  variation,  (g)  failure  to  observe  and  con- 
sider significant  divergence'  in  inconspicuous  but  funda- 
mental characteristics. 

Errors  that  may  arise  from  the  nature  of  the  inquiry,  or 
Internal  Matters  in  the  Document,  are  as  follows : 

(h)  Basing  conclusion  on  too  limited  amount  of  dis- 
puted writing  or  too  limited  amount  of  standard  writing, 
(i)  basing  conclusion  on  too  few  characteristics  or  char- 
acteristics of  unknown  value,  (j)  reaching  conclusion  with- 


ERRORS    IN    IDENTIFICATION    OF    HANDWRITING.  3 

out  knowing  date  of  writing  under  examination  or  date  of 
standard  writing,  (k)  giving  definite  opinion  on  mere 
marks  or  illegible  scrawls  which  contain  insufficient  or  no 
writing  individuality,  (1)  basing  conclusion  on  poor  or  in- 
accurate photographs. 

Errors  that  may  arise  under  the  third  head,  or  from 
External  Matters,  are  as  follows : 

(m)  Basing  conclusion  on  facts  and  circumstances  apart 
from  and  outside  of  the  handwriting  or  document  itself, 
(n)  reaching  conclusion  in  haste  or  under  unfavorable  cir- 
cumstances, (o)  forming  conclusion  from  influence  of  opin- 
ions of  others  or  reported  opinions  of  others,  (p)  reaching 
conclusion  in  the  absence  of  necessary  observing,  measur- 
ing, or  testing  instruments,  (q)  reaching  conclusion  in  cer- 
tain cases  before  helpful  enlarged  or  special  photographs 
are  made,  (r)  basing  conclusion  in  whole  or  in  part  upon 
antipathy,  friendship,  prejudice,  or  an  advocate's  advance 
argument  based  upon  alleged  facts  outside  of  the  writing 
itself,  (s)  reaching  conclusion  against  the  weight  of  evi- 
dence because  of  strong  prejudice  on  the  general  subject 
of  expert  testimony. 

The  result  of  every  handwriting  investigation  should  be 
carefully  tested  by  considering  these  possible  sources  of 
error.  Incompetent,  pretentious,  or  corrupt  witnesses  who 
testify  on  the  subject  can  be  most  effectively  cross-exam- 
ined along  these  lines.  Some  of  the  above  topics  require 
no  elaboration  as  their  bearing  is  obvious,  but  a  few  of 
the  principal  topics  are  here  more  fully  considered. 

There  are  two  main  questions  that  confront 'the  exam- 
iner of  an  alleged  forgery.  The  first  of  these  is  how  much 
and  to  what  extent  may  a  genuine  writing  diverge  from  a 
certain  type,  and  the  second  is  how  and  to  what  extent  will, 
a  more  or  less  skillful  forgery  be  likely  to  succeed  and  be 
likely  to  fail  in  embodying  the  characteristics  of  a  genuine 
writing.  Here  we  have  the  very  heart  of  the  problem  for 


4  48  AMERICAN  LAW  REVIEW. 

a  forgery  will  be  like  the  genuine  at  least  in  some  measure, 
and  there  is  bound  to  be  some  variation  in  the  genuine 
writing  itself. 

In  examining  a  disguised  writing  or  a  natural  writing 
for  the  purpose  of  determining  whether  or  not  it  was  writ- 
ten by  a  particular  writer,  two  main  questions  also  arise. 
We  must  know,  if  we  are  to  avoid  error,  what  is  natural 
and  habitual,  and  what  is  disguised.  With  these  two  ques- 
tions correctly  answered  all  the  rest  is  easy.  The  recog- 
nition of  personality  in  handwriting,  generally  assumed 
to  be  a  simple  and  easy  task,  is  sometimes  easy,  sometimes 
difficult,  and  sometimes  impossible.  The  capable  and  con- 
scientious investigator  approaches  every  task  as  if  it  was 
the  most  difficult  and  when  the  question  cannot  be  answered 
he  does  not  attempt  to  answer  it. 

From  even  a  brief  examination  of  the  circumstances  sur- 
rounding the  usual  handwriting  inquiry,  it  is  easy  to  un- 
derstand how  mistakes  are  possible.  Naturally  the  most 
common  cause  of  error,  as  already  suggested,  is  that  the 
difficulties  of  the  various  problems  are  not  appreciated, 
and  as  a  result  many  testify  on  the  subject  who  are  not 
and  never  would  become  qualified  to  do  so.  Others  testify 
who  have  not  studied  the  particular  question  submitted  in 
any  way  .whatever,  while  still  others  testify  not  only  with- 
out technical  preparation,  but  influenced  by  personal  in- 
terest or  strong  prejudice. 

Testimony  by  witnesses  of  these  classes  usually  consists 
of  mere  statements  of  opinions  and  therefore  is  of  but  lit- 
tle value  to  a  referee,  judge,  or  juryman  who  is  seeking 
assistance  that  will  aid  in  discovering  the  truth  regarding 
the  controversy.  It  would  be  equally  as  helpful  in  many 
cases  to  let  the  janitor  testify  or  to  take  witnesses  at  ran- 
dom from  the  audience  in  the  court-room. 

It  is  particularly  unfortunate  if  those  who  are  to  finally 
decide  a  case  of  this  kind  are  both  prejudiced  and  incom- 
petent. There  have  been  those  who  have  first  denied  that 


ERRORS    IN    IDENTIFICATION    OF    HANDWRITING.  5 

any  one  can  by  any  amount  of  study  and  experience  become 
qualified  to  assist  in  discovering  and  showing  the  facts  in 
such  a  matter,  and  then  have  themselves,  with  but  little 
study  and  without  thorough  investigation,  deliberately  pro- 
ceeded to  express  the  most  positive,  arbitrary,  and  often 
erroneous  opinions  on  the  technical  questions  presented. 
Prejudice  is  always  the  enemy  of  truth  and  of  progress. 

Handwriting  testimony,  especially  by  those  who  are  said 
"to  know"  a  handwriting,  often  becomes  a  mere  time-wast- 
ing farce.  In  many  instances  its  main  value,  if  not  its  main 
purpose,  consists  in  the  opportunity  it  affords  for  friends, 
relatives,  and  partisans  to  tell  in  public  under  oath  how 
they  think  a  law  suit  ought  to  be  decided.  Witnesses  of 
this  class,  in  many  instances,  are  not  nearly  as  well  qual- 
ified to  decide  the  question  as  the  intelligent  members  of 
an  ordinary  jury  who  have  the  advantage  of  having  all  the 
actual  papers  before  them  for  careful  study  and  compar- 
ison. In  many  a  will  case  or  claim  against  an  estate,  it  is 
highly  ridiculous  from  a  scientific  point  of  view,  to  see  the 
troop  of  dim-eyed  old  men  and  women  who  go  upon  the 
witness-stand  and  give  the  most  positive  technical  testi- 
mony regarding  handwriting. 

Unsatisfactory  as  such  proof  still  is  in  many  cases,  it  is 
pleasing  to  note  that  great  progress  has  been  made  during 
the  past  few  years  in  the  matter  of  proof  of  handwriting 
and  documents.  Improvement  has  been  brought  about  by 
various  causes,  but  mainly  by  putting  the  subject  on  a 
rational  basis  and  in  some  degree  making  testimony  tech- 
nical instruction  and  not  mere  statements  of  opinion.  This 
practice  has  been  made  possible  by  the  calling  of  competent 
witnesses  able  to  give  reasons  and  permitted  to  give  rea- 
sons for  opinions.  Some  of  the  improvement  has  been  due 
to  helpful  legislation,  and  much  of  it  has  resulted  from  the 
increasing  use  of  seeing,  measuring,  and  testing  instru- 
ments, but  the  enlarged  photograph  more  than  anything 
else  has  served  to  put  such  evidence  on  a  rational,  tangible, 


6  48  AMERICAN  LAW  REVIEW. 

demonstrative  basis.  All  this  improvement  has  been  made 
possible  by  the  gradual  adoption  of  an  enlightened  proced- 
ure allowing  a  freedom  in  the  interpretation  of  testimony 
not  permitted  in  any  court  a  few  years  ago.  By  these 
methods  the  facts  in  many  cases  can  now  be  absolutely 
proved  that  could  not  be  proved  a  few  years  ago.  Not- 
withstanding all  the  progress,  many  errors  are  still  made 
and  the  procedure  in  some  courts  is  still  under  eighteenth 
century  rules. 

The  practice  followed  in  the  proof  of  uncontested  doc- 
uments, by  calling  witnesses  who  are  said  to  "know"  the 
handwriting,  has  developed  certain  assumptions,  more  or 
less  false,  which  have  been  contributing  causes  of  error. 
Many  witnesses  testify  from  a  supposed  knowledge  of 
handwriting  when  in  fact  they  do  not  know  it;  they  them- 
selves would  not  depend  upon  their  own  judgment  if  there 
was  any  risk  in  it.  A  strange  rule  of  law,  however,  says 
that  one  "knows"  a  handwriting  if  he  has  seen  it  written 
once  in  any  way,  anywhere,  at  any  time,  by  anybody,  and 
this  unwise  rule  leads  many  witnesses  to  assume  tasks  they 
otherwise  would  not  attempt  to  perform.  - 

This  absurd  legalized  assumption  about  knowing  hand- 
writing probably  grew  out  of  another  strange  and  malevo- 
lent rule,  still  in  force  in  several  otherwise  enlightened 
states,  which  does  not  allow  any  standard  or  genuine  writ- 
ing whatever  of  any  kind  to  be  admitted  for  purposes  of 
comparison  with  a  disputed  writing.  It  therefore  became 
necessary  to  call  witnesses  who  are  said  to  "know"  the  writ- 
ing, and  partly  from  necessity,  it  was  decided  that  anyone 
"knew"  it  who  had  seen  it  written  even  once.  For  some  rea- 
son it  was  also  decided  that  these  same  witnesses  must  not 
compare  the  writing  at  the  time  of  testifying,  but  must  re- 
member it  as  they  originally  saw  it  and  then  testify.  Many 
of  these  old  practices  hark  back  to  the  time  when  the  aver- 
age juryman  could  not  write  and  when  writing  itself  was  a 
rare  accomplishment.  In  those  days  the  old  practice  may 


EKKOES    m    IDENTIFICATION    OF    HANDWRITING.  7 

have  been  less  objectionable,  but  that  time  has  long  since 
gone  by.  This  unfortunate  old  practice  continued  in  the 
United  States  Federal  Courts  until  the  enactment  of  the 
statute  of  1913 ! 

There  are  some  principles  underlying  the  subject,  and 
their  consideration  may  throw  some  light  on  the  question. 
In  the  first  place,  in  order  to  identify  handwriting  cor- 
rectly it  is  as  important  to  know  how  handwritings  by  dif- 
ferent writers  are  likely  to  resemble  each  other  as  to  know 
how  they  may  vary.  Writings  in  the  same  language  must 
inevitably  resemble  each  other  in  many  ways,  and  certain 
modifications  of  writings  in  the  same  language  must  neces- 
sarily have  many  similarities.  Handwritings  of  the  same 
system,  learned  in  the  same  schools,  also  writing  "by  dif- 
ferent writers  of  the  same  nationality  must  also  inevitably 
be  similar  in  many  ways.  As  a  basis,  therefore,  of  an  accu- 
rate judgment  on  the  identity  of  handwriting,  one  must 
possess  some  knowledge  of  these  basic  facts,  or  error  is 
not  only  possible  but  probable.  It  will  readily  appear  how 
one  attempting  to  identify  an  anonymous  letter  showing 
the  characteristics  of  an  unfamiliar  style  of  any  kind  will 
be  inclined  to  say  that  it  was  written  by  any  suspected 
writer  who  may  happen  to  write  that  unknown  style. 

It  may  be  a  dangerous  assumption  for  one  to  undertake 
to  identify  &  disputed  handwriting  who  is  unacquainted 
with  the  characteristics  of  the  ordinary  differing  styles  of 
handwriting  as  affected  by  use,  system,  nationality,  sex, 
age,  and  occupation.  This  special  knowledge  enables  the 
observer  to  recognize,  identify,  and  correctly  interpret  the 
great  variety  of  characteristics  which  must  be  depended 
upon  to  identify  a  piece  of  handwriting.  Judgment  on  the 
subject  must  finally  be  based  upon  a  study  of  similarities 
and  differences  as  compared  with  each  other,  for  to  some 
extent  there  must  be  both  in  any  two  specimens  of  hand- 
writing in  the  same  language.  A  mere  statement  of  these 
facts  is  sufficient  to  show  the  danger  when  handwriting 


8  48  AMERICAN  LAW  REVIEW. 

identification  is  made  by  those  without  experience  and 
without  any  knowledge  whatever  of  these  principles.  What 
illuminates,  vitalizes  and  safeguards  testimony  on  the 
subject  is  clear  and  intelligent  discussion  of  the  reasons 
for  the  opinions  expressed. 

The  controlling  principle  underlying  every  act  of  iden- 
tification is  that  sufficient  characteristics  must  combine  to 
exclude  the  practical  possibility  of  accidental  coincidence 
Accuracy  is  finally  dependent  upon  the  number  and  char- 
acter of  the  characteristics  relied  upon  and  error  may  re- 
sult either  because  a  conclusion  is  based  upon  too  few 
characteristics  or  from  a  misinterpretation  of  the  charac- 
teristics. Error  in  identifying  a  person  may  arise  from  a 
conclusion  based  upon  only  one  or  two  characteristics  of 
a  general  nature,  or  on  the  other  hand,  such  identification 
may  become  unmistakable  if  marks,  scars,  measurements, 
and  other  significant  characteristics  combine  in  sufficient 
number.  The  problem  in  all  identification  is  the  discovery 
and  weighing  of  the  characteristics. 

-To  one  unfamiliar  with  the  personal  characteristics  of 
a  foreign  race,  like  the  Chinese  for  example,  any  two  China- 
men of  about  the  same  age  look  much  alike.  The  reason 
for  this  is  that  only  the  pronounced  characteristics  are 
noted  and  these,  being  divergent  from  those  with  which 
the  observer  is  familiar,  make  different  individuals  look 
alike.  This  same  error  is  possible  in  any  kind  of  identifi- 
cation if  based  upon  characteristics  unfamiliar  to  the  ob- 
server. 

It  is  contended  that  handwriting  can  be  identified  as  we 
recognize  the  face  of  a  friend,  and  that  we  gain  a  knowl- 
edge of  it  incidentally  and  Without  effort.  It  is  true  that 
we  recognize  the  usual,  undisguised  writing  of  our  friends 
just  as  we  recognize  them  in  their  usual  dress  and  charac- 
ter. The  difficulty  is  that  a  disputed  writing  may  be  either 
a  clever  imitation  or  a  more  or  less  skillful  disguise,  and  in 
either  case  superficial  knowledge  of  a  handwriting,  limited 


ERRORS    IN    IDENTIFICATION    OF    HANDWRITING.  V 

to  the  recognition  of  only  its  conspicuous  or  surface  fea- 
tures, may  easily  lead  to  error.  Under  these  conditions 
the  very  least  similarity  is  often  taken  as  proof  of  genu- 
ineness or,  on  the  other  hand,  the  slightest  divergence  from 
normal  may  be  construed  as  proof  of  forgery,  the  error 
thus  going  in  either  direction. 

Other  sources  of  error  are  lack  of  knowledge  of  certain 
common  variations,  modifications,  and  developments  of 
handwriting  in  the  same  language,  and  unfamiliarity  with 
the  usual  normal  variation  in  the  handwriting  of  any 
writer.  It  is  inevitable  that  handwriting  should  be  some- 
what affected  by  the  conditions  under  which  it  is  written, 
and  one  who  attempts  to  identify  it  should  know  what  the 
reasonable  range  of  this  variation  is  and  this  fact  must 
always  be  taken  into  account  in  reaching  a  judgment  on 
the  subject. 

The  most  common  source  of  error  is  the  basing  of  opin- 
ions on  ''general  appearance"  alone.  In  such  judgments 
the  effect  of  system  or  national  characteristics  is  not  prop- 
erly considered  and  the  distinction  between  general  and 
individual  characteristics  is  not  made.  The  opinion  is  not 
based  upon  any  reasons  that  can  be  put  into  words,  but 
results  from  a  kind  of  assumed  occult  or  clairvoyant  power. 
This  fallacious  and  indefinite  doctrine  of  dependence  on 
"general  appearance"  alone  has  been  furthered  by  numer- 
ous legal  text  writers  whose  views  have  been  based  largely 
upon  certain  old  legal  opinions  that  have  been  cited  many 
times. 

All  prospective  witnesses  to  handwriting  should  be  ex- 
amined  as  experts  are  examined  for  the  purpose  of  deter- 
mining whether  they  have  sufficient  general  intelligence 
and  knowledge  on  the  subject  to  warrant  the  reception  of 
their  testimony.  Many  such  witnesses  who  have,  for  ex- 
ample, seen  writing  but  once  or  very  infrequently,  will 
frankly  say  if  properly  interrogated,  that  they  would  not 
in  any  way  depend  upon  their  own  judgment  in  the  matter. 


APPENDIX 


APPENDIX  479 


FINGER  PRINTS. 

There  is  a  constantly  increasing  use  of  finger  prints 
as  a  means  of  human  identification,  and  space  is  taken 
to  describe  a  new  photographic  method  of  comparison 
which  removes  the  objection  of  the  personal  equation 
of  the  witness,  which  must  be  present  in  the  method 
necessitating  the  drawing  by  hand  of  the  outlines  of  an 
indistinct  print. 

As  will  be  seen  by  the  illustrations,  in  the  proposed 
new  method  the  imprints  to  be  compared  are  photo- 
graphed with  a  superimposed  glass  plate  ruled  with  uni- 
form squares.  By  making  a  suitable  enlargement  and 
then  numbering  and  lettering  the  squares,  as  is  shown 
in  the  illustrations,  it  becomes  possible  to  compare  the 
characteristics  as  they  appear  in  any  similar  squares,  and 
it  is  also  possible  to  describe  definitely  the  square  to  which 
reference  is  made.  Thus  attention  can  be  directed  to 
square  "6-D,"  or  any  other  square  on  the  photographs 
of  different  prints,  to  discover  whether  or  not  the  im- 
pressions were  by  the  same  hand. 

One  of  the  illustrations  shows  black  on  wrhite.  the 
other  white  on  black.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  im- 
pressions in  general  outline  are  not  quite  identical  in  size, 
but  after  a  little  study  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  the 
two  impressions  must  have  been  made  by  the  same  hand. 
Not  only  this,  but  it  is  clear  that  no  two  human  hands 
in  all  the  world  can  be  just  alike  in  all  these  complex 
particulars. 


480 


APPENDIX 


wm  mm 


APPENDIX 


481 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

ARRANGED  ALPHABETICALLY  BY  AUTHORS 

Ames  on  Forgery.  By  Daniel  T.  Ames.  Ames-Rollinson  Company, 
New  York:  1900. 

The  Origin  and  Progress  of  Writing.  By  Thomas  Astle,  Esq. ,  F.  R.  S., 
F.  S.  A.,  and  Keeper  of  the  Records  in  the  Tower  of  London. 
London:  1784. 

The  Autographic  Mirror.  Vol.  I.,  Vol.  II.  Autographic  Letters  and 
Sketches  of  Illustrious  and  Distinguished  Men  of  Past  and  Present 
Times.  Cassell,  Petter  &  Galpin,  London  and  New  York:  1864. 

L'Autographe.  (December,  1863-October,  1865.)  Les  editeurs: 
H.  DeVillemessant.  G.  Bourdin,  Paris:  1864,  1865. 

Manipulation  of  the  Microscope.  By  Edward  Bausch.  Bausch  & 
Lomb  Optical  Company,  Rochester,  N.  Y. :  1897. 

The  Universal  Penman.  Engraved  by  George  Bickham,  London: 
1743. 

Les  Revelations  de  1'Ecriture  D'Apres  un  controle  scientifique.  Par 
Alfred  Binet.  Felix  Alcan,  Paris:  1906. 

The  Detection  of  Forgery.  By  Douglas  Blackburn  and  Captain 
Warthman  Caddell.  Charles  and  Edwin  Layton,  London:  1909- 

Bibliographic  der  Graphologie,  Von  Hans  H.  Busse,  Munchen,  1900. 
Butterworth's  Universal  Penman.    By  E.  Butter  worth.    London:  1799- 

The  Microscope  and  its  Revelatiops.  By  W.  B.  Carpenter.  Eighth 
Edition,  1901. 

Lectures  on  the  Art  of  Writing.  By  Joseph  Carstairs.  London: 
1814. 

Forty  Centuries  of  Ink.  By  David  N.  Carvalho.  The  Banks  Publishing 
Co.,  New  York:  1904. 

Alphabets  of  Characters.      By  Joseph  Champion.      London:    1735. 

The  Handwriting  of  Junius,  Professionally  Investigated.  By  Mr. 
Charles  Chabot,  Expert.  With  Preface  and  Collateral  Evidence 
by  the  Hon.  Edward  Twistleton.  London:  1871. 

[483] 


484  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

A  Booke  Containing  Divers  Sortes  of  Hands,  etc.  Set  forth  by  lohn 
de  Beau  Chesne  and  M.  lohn  Baildon.      Imprinted  at  London  by 
Thomas  Vautrouillier  dwelling  in  the  blackefrieres,  M.  D.  LXXXl. 
(This  curious  book  is  in  the  Library  of  Congress,  Washington.) 

The  Story  of  the  Alphabet.  By  Edward  Clodd.  D.  Appleton  &  Co., 
New  York:  1900. 

Fair  Writing.      By  Edward  Cocker.      London:   1657. 

A  Text-Book  of  Paper-Making.  By  C.  F.  Cross  and  E.  J.  Be  van. 
Third  Edition,  E.  &  F.  N.  Spon,  Ltd.,  London,  Spon  &  Cham- 
berlain, New  York:  1907. 

Modern  Microscopy.      By  M.  I.  Cross.     Third  Edition,  1903. 

The  History  of  Ink.      By  Thaddeus  Davids  &  Co.     New  York:   I860. 

The  Writing  Schoolmaster.      By  John  Davies  of  Hereford.      Sold  by 
Michaell  Sparke  at  ye  blue  Bibell  in  greene  Arbor,  London:  1631. 
(A  copy  of  this  book  is  in  the  Library  of  Congress,  Washington.) 

Dean's  Analytical  Guide  to  the  Art  of  Penmanship.  By  Henry  Dean. 
New  York:  1805. 

The  Instructor,  or  American  Young  Man's  Best  Companion.  By 
George  Fisher.  Philadelphia:  1737. 

American  Text-Book  for  Letters.    By  Nath'l  Dearborn.    Boston :  1846. 

Der  Nachweis  von  Schriftfalschungen,  Blut,  Sperma  usw.  unter  be- 
sonderer  beriicksichtigung  der  photographic,  von  Prof.  Dr.  M. 
Dennstedt  und  Dr.  F.  Voigtlander.  Friedrich  Viewig  &  Son, 
Braunschweig:  1906. 

Photography  for  Students  of  Physics  and  Chemistry.  By  Louis  Derr, 
M.  A.  S.  B.  The  Macmillan  Company,  New  York:  1906. 

Practical  Penmanship.  By  B.  F.  Foster.  Published  by  O.  Steele, 
Albany:  1832. 

Foster's  System  of  Penmanship.  By  B.  F.  Foster.  Published  by  Per- 
kins, Marvin  &  Co.,  Boston;  Henry  Perkins,  Philadelphia:  1835. 

"Junius"  Revealed.  By  his  surviving  grandson,  H.  R.  Francis.  Long- 
mans, Green  &  Co.,  London:  1894. 

Bibliotics  or  the  Study  of  Documents.  By  Persifor  Frazer.  J.  P. 
Lippincott  Company,  Philadelphia:  1901. 

Les  Ecrits  et  les  dessins  dans  les  Maladies  Nerveuses  et  Mentales. 
Dr.  J.  Rogues  de  Fursac.  Masson  et  Cie,  Editeurs,  Paris:  1905. 

Finger  Prints.  By  Francis  Galton,  F.  R.  S.,  etc.  Macmillan  &  Co., 
London  and  New  York:  1892. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  485 

Decipherment  of  Blurred  Finger  Prints.  By  Francis  Gal  ton,  F.  R.  S., 
etc.  Macmillan  &  Co.,  London  and  New  York:  1893. 

Finger  Print  Directories.      By  Francis  Galton.      London:   1895. 

Calligraphotechnia  or  The  Art  of  faire  writing,  etc.  By  Richard 
Gethinge.  Sold  by  -  -  Humble  at  the  white-horse  in  Popes 
head  alley  over  against  the  roiall  Exchange  in  London:  Anno 
Domini  l6l6. 

Registry  of  Water  Marks  and  Trade  Marks.  Andrew  Geyer,  Pub- 
lisher, New  York:  1906. 

The  Writing  Reader.  By  T.  Gilbert  &  F.  Prass.  Published  for  the 
Authors  by  D.  &  J.  McLellan,  New  York:  1858. 

Chemistry  of  Paper-Making.  By  Griffin  &  Little.  H.  Lock  wood, 
New  York. 

Handbuch  fur  Untersuchungsrichter  als  System  der  Kriminalistik  von 
Dr.  Hans  Gross.  4,  Auflage  J.  Schweitzer  Verlag  (Arthur 
Sellier)  .  Miinchen  :  1904.  English  translation  by  J.  &  C.  Adam, 
Lawyers  Co-operative  Publishing  Co.,  Rochester  and  New  York. 

Disputed  Handwriting.  By  William  E.  Hagan.  Banks  &  Brothers, 
New  York,  Albany,  N.  Y.  :  1894-. 

Classification  and  Uses  of  Finger  Prints.  Third  Edition.  By  E.  R. 
Henry,  C.  V.  O.,  C.  S.  I.  Darling  &  Son,  Ltd.,  London:  1905. 

4 

L'Art  De  Juger  Du  Caractere  Des  Hommes  Sur  Leur  Ecriture. 
Paris:  1816.  [Anonymous  but  written  by  L.  J.  F.  Hocquart.] 

Three-Colour  Photography.  By  Arthur  Freiherrn  von  Hubl.  A.  W. 
Penrose  &  Co.,  London:  1904. 

The  Origin  and  Progress  of  the  Art  of  Writing.  By  Henry  Noel 
Humphreys.  David  Bogue,  London:  MDCCCLIV. 

Miscellaneous  Papers  and  Legal  Instruments  under  the  hand  and  seal 
of  William  Shakspeare,  including  the  Tragedy  of  King  Lear  and  a 
small  fragment  of  Hamlet,  from  the  Original  MSS.  in  the  posses- 
sion of  Samuel  Ireland.  London: 


The    Confessions    of  William-Henry    Ireland.     Ellerton  &  By  worth, 
London:  1805. 

The  Theory  and  Practice  of  Handwriting.      By  John  Jackson,  F.  E. 
I.  S.      Sampson  Low,  Marston  &  Company,  Ltd.,  London:   1893. 

The  Art  of  Writing.      By  John  Jenkins.      Cambridge,   Mass.  :    1813. 

Die  Mikrophotographie,   von  Dr.   Paul  Jeserich.      Verlag  von  Julius 
Springer,  Berlin:   1888. 


486  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  Mystery  of  Handwriting.  By  J.  Harington  Keene.  Lee  & 
Shepard,  Publishers,  Boston:  1896. 

Pens,  Ink  and  Paper.  A  Discourse  upon  the  Caligraphic  Art  with 
Curiosa  and  an  Appendix  of  Some  Famous  English  Penmen.  By 
Daniel  W.  Kettle,  F.  G.  R.  S.,  Cosmographer.  London:  1885. 

Natural-Color  Photography.  By  Dr.  E.  Konig.  Translated  from  the 
German,  with  additions,  etc.,  by  E.  J.  Wall,  F.  R.  P.  S.  Daw- 
barn  &  Ward,  Ltd.,  London:  1906. 

Die  Schrift  bei  Geisteskrankheiten  ein  atlas  mi t  81  Handschriftproben, 
von  Dr.  Rudolf  Koster.  Verlag  von  Johann  Ambrosius  Barth, 
Leipzig:  1903. 

The  Manufacture  of  Ink.  Translated  from  the  German  of  Sigmund 
Lehner,  with  additions  by  William  T.  Brannt.  Henry  Carey 
Baird  &  Co.,  Philadelphia:  1892. 

The  Flying  Pen,  or  New  and  Universal  Method  of  Teaching  the  Art  of 
Writing,  etc.  By  James  Henry  Lewis.  London:  1806. 

The  Royal  Lewisian  System  of  Penmanship,  etc.  By  James  Henry 
Lewis.  London:  1816. 

Measurement  of  Light  and  Colour  Sensations.  By  Joseph  W.  Lovi- 
bond,  F.  R.  M.  S.  George  Gill  &  Sons,  London. 

Contributions  to  Photographic  Optics.  By  Otto  Lummer,  translated 
by  S.  P.  Thompson.  New  York:  1900. 

De  Re  Diplomatica.     By  Mabillon.      Paris:   1681. 

The  Origin  and  Progress  of  Letters  and  A  Compendium  Account  of 
the  most  celebrated  English  Penmen  with  the  Title  and  Character 
of  the  Books  they  published.  By  W.  Massey.  London:  1763. 

An  Inquiry  into  the  Authenticity  of  Certain  Miscellaneous  Papers  and 
Legal  Instruments  [Shakespeare  Forgeries]  .  By  Edmond  Ma- 
lone.  .London:  1796. 

Archiv  fiir  Gerichtliche  Schriftuntersuchungen  und  verwandte  Ge- 
biete.  Heft  1,  2,  3,  4.  Herausgegeben  von  Dr.  Georg  Meyer 
und  Dr.  Hans  Schneickert.  Verlag  von  Johann  Ambrosius  Barth, 
Leipzig:  1907,  1908. 

Sur  la  Methode  vicieuse  des  expertises  en  ecriture.  By  L'abbe  Michon. 
Paris:  1880. 

Inks,  Their  Composition  and  Manufacture.  By  C.  Ainsworth  Mitchell 
and  T.  C.  Hepworth.  Charles  Griffin  &  Company,  Ltd.,  Lon- 
don: 1904. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  487 

The  Autograph  Miscellany.  Netherclift  &  Durlacher.  London: 
1855. 

Lehrbuch  der  Mikrophotographie,  von  Dr.  Richard  Neuhauss.  Ver- 
lag  von  S.  Hirzel,  Leipzig:  1907. 

Handbuch  der  kriminalistischen  Photographic,  von  Friedrich  Paul. 
J.  Guttentag,  Verlagsbuchhandlung,  Berlin:  1900. 

Pay  son  &  Dun  ton's  Copy-Books.  By  J.  W.  Pay  son  and  Seldom  Dun- 
ton.  Boston:  1851. 

Theory  and  Art  of  Penmanship.  Payson,  Dunton  &  Scribner's 
Method  of  Teaching.  Crosby  &  Ainsworth,  Boston:  1862. 

Graphics,  a  Popular  System  of  Drawing  and  Writing.  By  Rembrandt 
Peale.  Philadelphia:  1842. 

The  Juvenile  Penman  or  Practical  Writing  Book  Engraved  on  Brass. 
By  A.  Picket.  New  York:  1817-18. 

Potter's  System  of  Penmanship.      By  S.  A.  Potter.      1864. 
Rand's  System  of  Writing.      By  B.  H.  Rand.      Philadelphia:  1834. 

La  Photographic  Judiciaire.  R.  A.  Reiss.  Charles  Mendel,  Editeur, 
Paris:  1903. 

What  Handwriting  Indicates.  By  John  Rexford.  G.  P.  Putnam's 
Sons,  New  York:  1904. 

The  Philosophy  of  Handwriting.  By  Don  Felix  de  Salamanca.  Lon- 
don :  1879- 

Die  Eisengallustinten.  Grundlagen  zu  ihrer  Beurtheilung.  Osw. 
Schluttig  und  Dr.  G.  S.  Neumann.  Zahn  &  Jaensch,  Dresden: 
1890. 

Handwriting  and  Expression,  translated  and  edited  by  John  Holt 
Schooling,  from  the  third  French  edition  of  1'Ecriture  et  le  Car- 
actere  par  J.  Crepieux-Jamin.  Kegan  Paul,  Trench,  Trubner  & 
Co.,  Ltd.,  London:  1892. 

A  Guide  to  the  Collector  of  Historical  Documents,  Literary  Manu- 
scripts and  Autograph  Letters,  etc.  By  Rev.  Dr.  Scott  and  Samuel 
Davey,  F.  R.  S.  L.  London,  S.  J.  Davey,  The  Archivist  Office, 
47  Great  Russell  Street,  Opposite  the  British  Museum:  1891. 

Autograph  Collecting.  By  Henry  T.  Scott,  M.  D.  L.  Upcott  Gill, 
London:  1894. 

Universal  Palaeography.  By  J.  B.  Silvestre.  Paris:  1839-41.  Lon- 
don: 1850. 


488 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Spencerian  Copy-Slips. 
Buffalo:  1848. 


By   Platt  R.    Spencer   and  Victor   M.    Rice. 


Spencerian  Key  to  Practical  Penmanship.      By  H.  C.  Spencer.      Ivi- 
son,  Blakeman,  Taylor  &  Co.,  New  York  and  Chicago:  1866. 

The  Manufacture  of  Paper.      By  R.  W.   Sindall,  F.  C.  S.      D.  Van- 
Nostrand  Co.,  New  York:   1908. 

"According  to  Cocker/'  The  Progress  of  Penmanship  from  the  Earliest 
Times.      ByW.  Anderson  Smith.      Alexander  Gardner,  London: 

1887. 

B.  F.  Stevens'  Fac-similes  of  Manuscripts  in  European  Archives  Relat- 
ing to  America,  1773-1783.      25  Vols.      London:   1889. 

The  Alphabet.      2  Vols.     By  Isaac  Taylor.      London:   1883. 


Manual  del  Peri  to  Caligrafo.      By   Enrique   Sanchez  Terrenes, 
prenta  De  Fortanet,  Madrid:   1902. 


Im- 


By  Sir  Edward  Maunde 
By  Wilhelm  Urban. 
Philadelphia : 


Handbook  of  Greek  and  Latin  Palaeography. 
Thompson.      1893. 

Kompendium  der  Gerichtlichen   Photographic. 
Leipsig:  1909. 

A  B  C  of  Photo-Micrography.      By  W.  H.  Wamsley. 
1902. 

Manuscripts,  Inscriptions  and  Muniments.  By  Henry  Smith  Williams. 
Merrill  &  Baker,  New  York:  1907. 

Universal  Classic  Manuscripts.  Vols.  I,  II.  Fac-similes  from  Originals 
in  the  Department  of  Manuscripts;  British  Museum.  With  De- 
scriptions, Editorial  Notes,  References  and  Translations  by  George 
F.  Warner,  M.  A.,  Ass't  Keeper  of  Manuscripts  British  Museum. 
M.  Walter  Dunne,  Publisher,  Washington  and  London. 


INDEX 


Abrasion  erasures,  see  Erasures. 

Additions,  fraudulent,  75;  and 
interlineations,  422;  often 
made  to  wills,  422;  test  of  ink 
on,  424;  see  Erasures. 

Admission  of  Standards,  16; 
Law  in  various  states,  17;  see 
Standards. 

Age,  tremor  of,  117-119;  shown 
by  design  of  letters,  169. 

Age  of  Documents,  6,  9,  10,  431; 
study  of  subject  of  age,  432; 
shown  by  typewriting,  433, 
440,  447;  by  handwriting, 
433;  by  ink,  8,  434;  by  con- 
tents, 432;  by  paper,  434; 
simulated  age  by  artificial 
means,  435. 

Age  of  Writer,  may  affect 
standards,  21,  23,  105;  shown 
by  system,  185,  216;  may 
show  age  of  document,  433. 

Age  of  Writing,  shown  by  ink, 
74;  by  copying  pencil,  167;  by 
figures,  187;  by  system,  167- 
195;  artificial  aging,  435: 

Alignment  of  Writing,  in  Angu- 
lar system,  107;  irregular  in 
tremor  of  age,  119;  of  illiter- 
ate writing,  121;  definition, 
123-125. 

Alterations,  documents  contain- 
ing, 6,  8,  75;  see  Erasures. 

American  Handwriting,  many 
changes  in,  168;  main  divi- 
sions of,  170;  changes  in,  173, 
174,  175;  lack  of  knowledge 
of,  208. 

Angular  Writing,  movement  in, 
107;  may  show  through  dis- 
guise, 144,  192;  a  distinct 
woman's  hand,  173;  illustra- 


tion   of,    184;    shows    sex    in 
anonymous  letters,   315,    316. 

Angularity,  an  important  char- 
acteristic, 173,  188;  illustra- 
tion of  different  systems,  225. 

Anonymous  Letters,  see  Letters. 

Anxiety,  of  forger  affects  result, 
120,  252;  in  pencil  forgery, 
165;  limits  skill,  205,  236, 
239,  243,  252;  in  traced  for- 
gery, 269,  279. 

Arnold's   Ink,    338. 

Arrangement  of  Writing,  con- 
ditions governing,  141;  un- 
consciousness of,  141;  anony- 
mous letters,  312;  in  forgery 
over  genuine  signature,  428. 

Astle,   Thomas,    193. 

Attention  to  details,  evidence  of 
forgery,  251. 

Autograph  album  signature, 
forged  note  over,  427. 

Autographs  of  noted  persons 
often  forged,  9,  192,  194,  373, 
434. 

Badlam,   C.    G.,    189. 

Bank  Clerk,  time  only  for  "gen- 
eral appearance,"  245. 

Banks,  only  one  standard  sig- 
nature kept,  19;  depositors' 
signatures  often  poor  stand- 
ards, 25;  loss  on  "raised" 
paper,  412;  quick  tests  the 
banker  may  use,  413;  should 
investigate  new  customers, 
414;  certain  practices  con- 
demned, 414;  blank  forms 
that  make  forgery  difficult, 
416;  see  Erasures. 


Bausch,    Edward,    71. 


[489] 


490 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Bausch  &  Lomb  Magnification 
Table,  85. 

Bertillon  Measurements,  small 
number  of,  233. 

Binet,  Alfred,  318. 

Black-board,  use  of  in  court, 
472;  N.  Y.  law  on,  471. 

Black-hand  letters,  11,  325. 
Bleaching   Agent,    435. 

Blotter  impression  and  original, 
313,  329. 

Boyer  case,  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  292, 
297;  illustration  of,  103. 

Burbank  case,  illustrated,  114, 
115,  265;  Mr.  Justice  Ward's 
charge  in,  258. 

Bureau  of  Standards,  certify 
lenses,  51;  certify  measures, 
95. 

Burr,  Professor  George  L.,  on 
palaeography,  195. 

Burtis  case,  quotation  from 
opinion,  120;  illustrated,  263; 
opinion  in,  275. 

Byrnes,    Thomas,    415. 

Bankers,  practice  regarding 
standards,  19,  28;  signature 
cards  not  good  standards,  25; 
interest  in  raised  papers,  412; 
quick  tests  to  discover  fraud, 
413;  certain  practices  con- 
demned, 414. 

Caliper,   micrometer,    97,    364. 

Camera  for  document  photog- 
raphy, 40,  54-64. 

Camera  Lucida,  83;  drawing 
with,  115. 

Capitals,  use  of  in  holograph 
forgery,  254. 

Care  of  Questioned  Documents, 
1. 

Carelessness,  shows  genuineness, 
120;  shown  by  pen  pressure, 
134;  in  holograph  documents, 
251;  in  ending  strokes,  115, 
118. 


Certainty  of  proof  of  forgery 
differs,  14. 

Characteristics,    see   Writing. 
Check  Protectors,   46,   411. 

Chemical  Abstracts,  Vol.  2,  No. 
4,  411. 

Chemical  applications  to  pro- 
duce appearance  of  age,  435. 

Chemical  Erasures,  in  standards, 
27;  reproduced,  43;  in  docu- 
ments, 408. 

Chemical  Tests,  when  to  be 
made,  1,  341,  385. 

Classes  of  Questioned  Docu- 
ments, 6-15. 

Coincidence,  of  two  writings,  12; 
accidental,  when  possible, 
211;  improbability  of  two 
persons,  183,  227;  exact,  very 
improbable,  277. 

Coleridge,  Mr.  Justice,  31,  33, 
213. 

Color  Filters,  67,  68,  345. 

Color  Microscope,  use  of,  74, 
102;  description  of,  355;  il- 
lustration of,  357;  examina- 
tion of  interlineation,  424. 

Color,  study  of,  356;  delicate 
tints  recorded,  358;  compari- 
son of,  359;  three  color  illus- 
tration, 361;  age  of  ink 
shown  by,  362. 

Comparison,  careful,  to  be  made, 
244;  Professor  James  on,  257. 

Comparison,  a  process  of  reason- 
ing, 212,  257,  260. 

Comparison  of  Hands,  16;  not  at 
first  allowed,  30-34;  not  like 
other  expert  testimony,  260. 

Composition,  in  holograph  forg- 
ery, 254. 

Conflicts  of  Expert  Testimony, 
474. 

Connections  between  letters,  226. 

Continuity,  to  be  investigated, 
8;  shown  by  photographs, 


INDEX 


491 


43,  65;  lack  of,  shown  by 
pen,  158;  lack  of,  in  pencil 
writing,  163;  shown  by  line 
or  stroke,  242;  of  holograph 
document,  251;  of  questioned 
addition,  424;  tests  of  con- 
tinuity, 425. 

Copy  Book  Forms,  alone  do  not 
identify,  214;  not  exactly  fol- 
lowed, 231. 

Crawford-Schooley  case,  290. 

Crossed  Lines,  press  copy  not 
to  be  made,  4,  387;  to  be 
observed,  9;  in  altered  docu- 
ments, 9;  photographs  of,  48; 
illustration  of,  75;  sequence 
of  writing  shown  by,  375; 
sometimes  impossible  to  ans- 
wer, 375;  order  of  writing 
may  be  vital,  376;  crossed 
line  characteristics,  377;  a 
microscopic  question,  378; 
as  affected  by  use  of  blotter, 
380;  lapse  of  time  affects 
question,  378,  382;  sequence 
shown  by  ink  borders,  382; 
with  nigrosine  ink,  75,  383; 
conditions  affecting  result, 
385;  possibility  of  error,  386; 
made  with  pencil,  389;  pencil 
strokes  over  ink,  389;  ink 
lines  over  rubber  stamp,  390; 
to  show  comparative  age, 
391;  in  Russell  case,  Boston, 
393;  in  forgery  over  genuine 
signature,  423,  428. 

Date  of  Standard  writing,  18. 

Date  of  Writing  may  be  im- 
portant, 216. 

Dates  of  Documents  from  hand- 
writing, 22. 

Day  vs.  Cole,  case  of,  297. 
Dearborn,    Nathl.,    189. 

Demonstrative  Evidence,  by 
photographs,  36;  by  micro- 
scope, 70;  by  instruments,  89; 
of  documents,  212,  257,  260, 
399,  474. 

Design  of  Letters,  see  Form. 


Details,  attention  to  in  forgery, 
251,  253. 

Defacing  of  Paper  to  hide  forg- 
ery, 8,  435. 

Dennstedt,  Dr.  M.,  348,  417. 

Disguised  Writing,  definition,  11, 
12,  233;  proof  of,  13,  14;  in 
request  writing,  23;  usually 
only  superficial,  144;  by 
changing  slant,  201;  difficulty 
of,  226,  305;  a  double  pro- 
cess, 233;  thought  to  be  easy 
task,  306;  gives  thought  to 
conspicuous  features,  308. 

Disguised  Letters,  11;  see  Let- 
ters. 

Dividers,  to  be  used  with  care, 
2. 

Documents,  care  of,  1;  unneces- 
sary folding  of,  1,  2;  glass 
covers  for,  2;  dangerous 
tests  not  to  be  permitted,  4; 
to  be  put  in  custody  of  court, 
4;  classes  of  questioned,  6; 
defaced  to  hide  character,  8; 
alleged  ancient,  10. 

Document  Camera,  illustrated, 
40,  54,  61;  description,  53. 

Document  Photographs,    55-69. 

Drawing  movement,  in  forgery, 
73,  118,  238,  253. 

Education,  degree  of,  in  anony- 
mous letters,  305,  314. 

End  strokes,  importance  of,  115, 
118. 

England,  changed  handwriting 
procedure,  16. 

English  Handwriting,  develop- 
ment of,  192,  193. 

Enlargements,  necessity  for,  38, 
39,  48,  57,  62,  124,  390,  399. 

Entire  Document,  see  Holo- 
graph. 

Envelopes,  to  show  date,  10,  366, 
432. 


492 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Erasures,  on  standards,  27; 
shown  by  photography,  44; 
by  abrasion,  44,  88,  405;  and 
changes  in  documents,  404; 
methods  of  examination,  406; 
"raised"  papers,  407;  by 
"ink  eradicators,"  408;  de- 
vices to  prevent  raising,  409; 
quick  tests  to  discover  "rais- 
ing," 413;  to  restore  writing, 
409. 

Errors  due  to  insufficient  stand- 
ards, 19,  28;  due  to  haste, 
125;  due  to  conditions,  199; 
mistaking  general  for  indi- 
vidual characteristics,  206; 
from  "general  appearance," 
212;  possible  under  some 
conditions,  241;  in  identify- 
ing anonymous  letters,  304, 
322;  see  Pretenders. 

Essenhower,   see  Messchert. 
Evidence,    force    of,    in    forgery 
cases,  14. 

Examinations,  should  be  prompt, 
15;  at  two  sittings,  7,  243; 
purposeless  of  no  value,  15, 
125,  213;  to  be  made  with 
care,  243,  246,  253. 

Expert  Testimony  regarding  doc- 
uments, enforced  by  instru- 
ments, 89;  of  varified  quality, 
IX;  regarding  document  per- 
mits of  illustration,  89,  190; 
regarding  documents  not  like 
other  expert  testimony,  260. 

Eye,  limit  of  vision  of,  71. 

Eyesight,  poor,  may  cause  dis- 
tortions, 119;  too  poor  to  do 
retouching,  120,  202. 

Famous  People,  writing  often 
forged,  192,  373,  434. 

Feigned  Writing,   12. 

Feminine      characteristics,      see 

Sex. 

Figures,  questioned,  255-257; 
show  age  of  writer,  187. 

Filar  Micrometer,  81,  100;  meas- 
urements with,  82;  to  meas- 
ure pen  strokes,  159;  use  in 


crossed  line  inquiries,  378; 
to  test  questioned  additions, 
424. 

Finger  Prints,  479. 

Folds  in  Paper,  writing  over,  9, 
48,  394;  relation  to  writing 
shown  by  microscope,  73; 
illustration  of,  74;  examina- 
tion of,  88;  ink  affects  result, 
397;  pencil  line  over,  398; 
stereoscopic  illustrations  of, 
399,  400,  401;  in  forgery 
over  genuine  signature,  423, 
428;  across  questioned  post- 
scripts, 434. 

Foreign  Writing,  persistence  in 
later  style,  169,  170;  traces 
of  easily  recognized,  175,  182; 
errors  in  identifying,  207; 
see  German. 

Forger,  task  of,  234;  gives  pain- 
ful attention  to  details,  200; 
not  satisfied  with  careless, 
distorted  writing,  202;  condi- 
tions surrounding,  236;  self- 
conscious,  239;  strain,  fear 
and  anxiety  of,  243,  252. 

Forgery,  proof  of,  1,  3,  7,  210, 
259;  definition  of,  13,  233; 
certainty  of  proof,  14;  vari- 
ous degrees  of  perfection,  14; 
proved  without  comparison, 
18;  proof  of  usually  by  com- 
parison, 18;  characteristic 
movements  of,  111,  112,  113, 
115;  mainly  of  forms,  115, 
238;  tremor  of,  117,  118; 
anxiety  produces  poor  result, 
120;  line  quality  shows,  133; 
often  inclines  upward,  140; 
with  pencil  uncommon,  164; 
of  unfamiliar  system  very 
difficult,  183,  185;  may  on 
first  view  appear  genuine, 
199,  214;  reason  for  difficulty, 
226;  conditions  surrounding, 
236;  actual  forgery  poor 
work,  237;  may  be  intrinsic- 
ally bad,  245;  more  formal 
than  genuine,  279;  great  sum 
lost  in  forgery,  414;  "clear- 
ing house"  for  forgeries,  414; 
business  forms  to  prevent 


IXDKX 


493 


forgery,  416;  writing  over 
genuine  signature,  426;  of 
writing  of  celebrated  people, 
192,  373,  434. 

Form,  this  only  thought  of  in 
forgery,  106,  115,  137,  252; 
original  background  of  a 
handwriting,  168;  only  one 
of  writing  characteristics, 
173;  copy  book  does  not 
identify,  214;  great  variety 
of,  217,  218;  simplest  part 
of  forgery,  238;  may  have 
great  significance,  241;  may 
show  nationality,  242;  in 
traced  forgery  may  be  close- 
ly followed,  267;  only  consid- 
ered in  traced  forgery,  270. 

Freedom  in  Writing,  shows  gen- 
uineness, 106,  120,  133,  140. 

General  Appearance,  32;  defined, 
212;  may  mislead,  213,  244; 
affected  by  connections,  226; 
the  first  test,  244;  bank  clerk 
must  depend  upon,  245;  too 
much  time  given  to.  253; 
alone  may  show  traced  forg- 
ery to  be  genuine,  267. 

Genuineness,  how  shown,  7; 
proof  of,  19;  evidences  of, 
119,  133,  140,  202,  203;  shown 
by  number  and  character  of 
characteristics,  208,  259; 
hasty  opinion  not  to  be  given, 
245;  shown  by  freedom,  251, 
280,  255. 

Genuine  Writing,  not  admitted 
for  comparison,  16. 

German,  writing  characteristics 
of,  206,  312;  accent  not  easily 
changed,  196;  quotation 
marks  in,  312. 

Grammar,  in  holograph  forgery, 
254;  in  anonymous  letters, 
305. 

Graphology,  and  arrangement, 
145;  errors  of,  208;  general 
appearance  of,  212;  Keene 
quoted,  213;  and  anonymous 
letters,  318;  weakness  of,  318, 
319. 


Gross,  Dr.  Hans  (Berlin),  268. 
Grounds  of  Belief,  see  Reasons. 

Habits,  writing,  how  acquired, 
141  unconsciousness  of,  143, 
190  opposite  do  not  exist, 
201  not  easily  changed,  202; 
always  to  be  compared,  241; 
variation  in  holograph  docu- 
ments, 251. 

Handwriting  as  means  of  identi- 
fication, 10;  two  questions 
regarding,  11;  not  disguised, 
12;  natural  and  unfeigned. 
12;  complex  character  of, 
141;  proof  of  may  be  a  farce, 
16,  18;  of  different  dates  may 
vary,  20;  affected  by  condi- 
tions, 21;  individualized  from 
beginning,  21;  scientific  ex- 
amination of,  105;  move- 
ments in,  106;  forms  of  not 
the  only  characteristics,  106; 
nervous  organization  basis  of, 
106;  speed  an  important 
characteristic,  111;  original 
styles,  183;  "on  the  wall," 
195;  identity,  how  shown, 
210,  259;  how  varied,  230;  a 
complicated  act,  239;  a  co- 
ordinated movement,  240; 
most  difficult  to  imitate,  240; 
identity  same  as  personal, 
259;  change  in  may  show 
age  of  document,  433;  proof 
of,  473. 

Handwriting  Evidence,  serious 
character  of,  243. 

Handwriting  Investigation, 
method  of,  243;  how  to  sub- 
mit questions,  246;  points  to 
consider,  246-249;  same  to 
prove  genuineness  as  forgery, 
255. 

Hasty  Judgment,  danger  of,  7, 
243,  304. 

Hesitation,  may  be  evidence  of 
forgery,  245,  252,  254. 

Hewitt   Will    case,   pens    in,    158. 
Hidden    Characteristics,    190. 

Holland  J.  G.  "Sevenoaks"  re- 
ferred to,  57. 


494 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Holograph,  Documents,  class  of, 
6;  vulnerable  if  not  genuine, 

9,  240;    forgery   of  very   dif- 
ficult, 251;  procedure  regard- 
ing,  250,   253. 

Howland,  Sylvia  Ann,  case,  277; 
Prof.  Pierce's  testimony  in, 
285;  illustrations  of,  301. 

Hubl  von,  on  color  photography, 
346. 

Humidity,  affects  ink,  354;  af- 
fects paper,  435. 

/ 

Humphreys,  Henry  Noel,   168. 
Hyland  case,  263. 

Identification,  from  disguised 
writing,  14;  from  handwrit- 
ing may  be  positive,  14;  prin- 
ciples of,  226;  from  writing, 
24,  197. 

Identification  by  handwriting,  6, 

10,  212,     227;     by    disguised 
signature,  13;   by  unaccount- 
able    variation,     217;     slight 
from    traced    forgery,    280. 

Identity  of  two  signatures,  may 
be  suspicious,  18,  254,  279; 
legal  opinions  on,  274-276; 
significance  of,  in  alleged 
tracing,  281,  282,  283,  284; 
of  position  of  forgeries,  281; 
exact  identity  proof  of  forg- 
ery, 282;  in  Boyer  case,  Buf- 
falo, N.  Y.,  284;  shown  by 
photography,  287. 

Identity  of  Writer,  shown  by 
combination  of  features,  210; 
by  comparison  with  standard, 
227;  how  shown,  230;  and 
difference,  study  of,  260. 

Idioms,  in  holograph  forgery, 
254;  in  anonymous  letters, 
315;  see  Subject  Matter. 

Illiterate,  clumsy  hesitation  of, 
105;  tremor  of,  117,  121; 
and  anonymous  letters,  313. 

Imitating,   affects   freedom,    243. 

Inconspicuous  Characteristics, 
importance  of,  308. 


Individuality,  of  writing,  21,  22, 
105,  138,  184,  190,  197;  how 
shown,  212;  of  a  particular 
letter,  215;  positive  charac- 
ter of,  in  writing,  217;  of 
writing  same  as  of  person, 
259;  cause  of,  184. 

Ink,  special  care  of  on  docu- 
ment, 4;  color  of  observed  on 
first  view,  8;  may  show  age 
of  writing,  8;  and  alterations, 
9;  uneven  distribution  on 
drawn  forgery,  47,  73;  and 
questioned  documents,  249, 
330;  opportunity  for  charla- 
tans, 330;  common  classes  of 
ink,  331;  sediment  in,  76; 
to  ascertain  composition,  333; 
nigrosine  ink,  336;  German 
article  on,  336;  English  inks, 
338;  how  same  class  of  inks 
may  differ,  339;  changes  in 
bottle,  340;  manner  of  mak- 
ing tests,  341;  effect  of  blot- 
ter, 343;  photographic  tests, 
344;  age  of  ink,  74,  102,  348; 
Dr.  Dennstedt  on,  348;  age 
of  colored  inks,  349;  lead 
pencil  writing,  age  of,  350;  to 
find  and  show  if  ink  has  not 
matured,  350;  bearing  on  al- 
leged old  writing,  351;  rate 
of  development  of  final  color, 
352;  use  of  color  microscope, 
355;  employment  of  Lovi- 
bond  glasses,  356;  method  of 
measurement  of  color,  358; 
age  not  to  be  told  by  one 
examination,  360;  changes 
unmistakable,  362;  propor- 
tions of  "btfack"  inks  in  com- 
mon use,  362;  fluidity  of,  397; 
changes  over  erasure,  405; 
over  chemica-1  erasure,  409; 
to  be  tested  and  examined  by 
daylight,  424;  appearance  of 
old  ink  lines,  435. 

Instruments,  description  of,  89- 
104. 

Interlineations,  fraudulent,  9, 
75;  in  wills,  422;  see  Addi- 
tions. 

Intuition,  not  to  be  relied  upon, 
213,  245. 


INDEX 


495 


Ireland,  William  Henry,  the  lit- 
erary forger,  192,  194,  373. 

Involuntary  Characteristics,  12, 
190. 

Iodine  Test,  for  erasures,  409. 
"Italian  Hand,"  171,  172,  192. 
"J"    in    old    "round    hand,"    191. 

James,  Professor  William,  143. 
201,  234,  258,  323. 

Jastrow,  Professor  Joseph,  205, 
239. 

Judd,  Professor  C.  H.,  106,  143, 
240. 

Judge,  to  enlarge  powers  of,  323. 
Junius,   handwriting   of,   260. 

Juxtaposition,  for  comparison, 
41;  of  typewriting,  57;  Wig- 
more  on,  41;  to  show  iden- 
tity or  difference,  323. 

Keene,   J.   Harrington,    213,    319. 
Kinsley,  William   J.,   326,    429. 
Kynast,  Richard,  on  inks,  336. 
"L.    R.    A.,"    quoted,    17,    33,    39. 

Lay  Witnesses  on  handwriting, 
473. 

Lenses,  perfection  of,  51;  for 
document  photography,  58. 

Letters,  anonymous,  6,  10; 
Black-hand,  11;  by  those 
under  suspicion,  11;  one 
standard  may  be  enough,  19; 
like  holograph  forgery,  252; 
arrangement  Of  parts,  142; 
system  features  important, 
185;  often  work  of  insane, 
302;  strange  facts  about,  303; 
identification  not  usually  dif- 
ficult, 305;  not  well  disguised, 
306;  points  to  be  considered, 
307;  inconsistent  with  each 
other,  307;  assumed  illiter- 
acy in,  314;  how  to  find 
standards,  321;  method  to  be 
followed,  322;  and  envelopes 
connected  by  postmarks,  432. 

Letter  Designs,  not  the  only 
characteristics,  106. 


Limitations,  of  expert  ability,  X, 
29,  209,  241,  375. 

Line  Edges,  character  of,  131; 
conditions  affecting,  132. 

Line  Quality,  23;  shows  speed, 
force,  freedom,  114;  how 
produced,  116,  117;  in  forg- 
ery, 137;  affected  by  pen 
position,  127;  in  traced  forg- 
ery, usually  bad,  269,  286; 
shown  in  Figs.  53,  54. 

Line  Widths,  measure  for,  96; 
of  shades,  136;  increased  over 
erasure,  405;  in  questioned 
additions,  159,  424. 

Literary  Ability,  in  anonymous 
letters,  305. 

Lovibond,   J.   W.,    356. 
Mabillon,    195. 
Magnification  table,  85. 
Magnifying  Glasses,  kinds,  91. 
Malone,   Edmond,   373. 

Marks  and  Scars,  identification 
by,  211,  227-235,  259. 

Masculine    Characteristics,    315. 

Materials,  may  show  fraud,  6; 
in  holograph  forgery,  254. 

Mathematical  Calculations,  and 
disputed  writing,  217;  in 
Howland  case,  277. 

Measurements,  instruments  for, 
92;  certified  by  bureau  of 
standards,  95;  of  shaded 
strokes,  136;  to  show  size  of 
writing,  146;  of  pen  strokes, 
159. 

Messchert  case,  112;  illustra- 
tions of,  294,  295. 

Meyer,  Dr.   George,   336. 

Microscope,  and  questioned 
documents,  70;  makes  evi- 
dence visible,  70;  and  pho- 
tography mutually  helpful, 
73;  shows  pen  lifts  and  eras- 
ures, 73,  77;  degrees  of  mag- 
nification, 78;  special  for 
documents,  4,  80,  81,  102; 


496 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


special  foot  for,  41,  82;  mag- 
nification table,  85;  stereo- 
scopic miscroscope,  86;  law 
of,  87;  simple  microscopes, 
91;  for  color  examination, 
74,  102,  355;  to  prove  gen- 
uineness, 245;  in  crossed  line 
inquiries,  378;  in  writing 
over  folds  in  paper,  398. 

Mitchell,  C.  A.,   336. 

Model  Writing,  may  be  of  wrong 
date,  22;  may  not  be  accur- 
ately followed,  266,  278;  not 
usually  found,  267;  for  traced 
forgery,  267;  may  be  put  in 
case,  267;  may  be  of  wrong 
date,  273;  choice  of,  may  be 
wrong,  273;  finding  of  strong 
proof  of  forgery,  278. 

Movement,  unnatural  shown  by 
photographs,  57;  shown  by 
microscope,  73;  like  drawing 
in  forgery,  117,  118;  more 
defective  than  form  in  forg- 
ery, 252;  defined,  106;  defec- 
tive in  forged,  106,  253;  in 
best  writing,  108;  variation 
in  number  of  movements. 
Ill;  affected  by  shading,  139; 
in  different  systems,  173,  179. 
181;  affected  by  anxiety,  238; 
difficult  to  imitate,  238; 
shown  by  strokes,  242;  imi- 
tation of  in  holograph  docu- 
ment, 251;  in  traced  forgery, 
286. 

Miinsterberg,  Prof.  Hugo,  205. 
Muscular  Habits,  106. 

Muscular  Skill,  in  writing,  105; 
may  be  too  great  in  forgery, 
116;  necessary  in  forgery, 
238. 

Nationality,  shown  by  handwrit- 
ing, 170. 

Nigrosine    Ink,    333,    335,    336. 

Nibs,  marks  of,  155. 

Obscene,   anonymous  letters,   10. 

Occupation,  shown  by  writing, 
144,  184. 


Offhand  Opinions,  not  to  be 
given,  28,  125,  209,  243;  given 
by  volunteers,  304. 

"O.  K.'d"  forgeries  paid,  414. 

Old  Writing,  shown  by  photog- 
raphy, 44;  shown  by  ink,  435. 

Order  of  Writing,  see  Crossed 
Lines. 

Original    Hands,     183. 

Palaeography,  the  study  of,  194, 
195. 

Paper,  size,  shape  and  color  to 
be  observed,  8;  made  after 
date  of  document,  10;  shown 
by  photographs,  46,  48;  in- 
struments for  measuring,  98; 
ink  over  folds,  see  Folds;  ex- 
amination of,  249;  of  holo- 
graph forgeries,  254;  and 
questioned  documents,  363- 
373;  evidence  sometimes  con- 
clusive, 363;  characteristics 
that  identify,  364;  thickness 
test  with  micrometer  cali- 
pers, 364;  history  of  printed 
forms,  365;  identification  by 
matched  perforations,  366; 
matching  of  paper  and  en- 
velopes, 10,  366,  432;  match- 
ing of  torn  edges,  368;  ascer- 
taining date,  369;  date  by 
watermark,  369;  process  of 
manufacture,  370;  dated 
watermarks,  46,  371;  forged 
watermarks,  372;  used  in 
Shakespeare  forgeries,  373; 
books  on  paper  making,  374; 
fiber  disturbed  by  erasure, 
405;  in  forgery  over  genuine 
signature,  429. 

Parr  case,  illustration  of,  264, 
296. 

Patched  Writing,  18,  136;  see 
Retouching. 

Patrick   case,   see   Rice   case. 

Payson,  Dunton  &  Scribner,  an 
American  hand,  172,  176,  177. 

Pen  and  Alterations,  9. 


INDKX 


497 


Pen  Position,  in  pencil  writing, 
22;  variation  in,  126-131; 
may  indicate  forgery,  136, 
137. 

Pen  Pressure,  in  pencil  writing, 
22;  of  forgery,  117,  254; 
definition  of,  132-134;  variety 
of,  132;  in  forged  writing, 
136. 

Pen  Strokes,  width  of,  82,  96, 
155. 

Pen,  points  of,  154;  width  of 
point,  155;  stub,  130,  156, 
157;  writing  identified  by 
pen,  157;  in  Hewitt  will  case, 
158;  stylographic,  fountain, 
gold,  quill,  160,  161;  change 
of,  affects  writing,  200;  iden- 
tity of,  in  questioned  addi- 
tions, 424. 

Pen-Lifts,  in  forgery,  73,  115, 
116,  137,  245,  252;  in  genuine 
writing,  121,  122,  123,  173; 
in  traced  forgeries,  269,  272. 

Pencil  Marks,  on  questioned 
document,  77,  273. 

Pencil  Writing,  forms  and  pen 
pressure  in,  22;  erasures 
shown  by  photographs,  45; 
outline  for  forgery,  77;  often 
questioned,  162,  164;  how 
produced,  162;  direction  of 
stroke,  163;  continuity  of, 
163;  photographs  of  pencil 
forgery,  64,  '166;  with  copy- 
ing pencils  may  show  age, 
167;  easily  forged,  270;  sus- 
piciously retouched,  270; 
copy  for  traced  forgery,  273; 
over  fold  in  paper,  398. 

Personal  Characteristics,  signifi- 
cance of,  230. 

Personality,  Human,  cause  of 
variety,  217;  like  handwrit- 
ing, 218;  identity  of,  227,  230. 

Personal  writing  characteristics, 
11,  197,  210,  211;  individual 
forms,  215. 

Photographs,  necessity  for,  36- 
43,  245;  objections  to,  37,  51; 


law  of,  38,  39;  stereoscopic, 
47-49,  399;  by  side  light,  50, 
65,  66;  transmitted  light,  45- 
47,  67;  photo-micrographs, 
47,  60;  directions  for  making, 
53-59;  juxtaposed,  41,  56,  57, 
323;  enlargements,  38,  47,  48, 
56,  58,  59;  reversed,  67;  color 
filters,  67,  68,  345;  show  pen- 
lifts  of  forgery,  116;  of  pen- 
cil forgeries,  166;  opinions 
not  to  be  based  on  exclusive- 
ly, 166;  of  holograph  forgery 
very  important,  254;  of 
traced  forgeries,  286;  size  of 
photographs  desirable,  286; 
of  traced  forgery  under 
ruled  squares,  289;  duplicate, 
for  jury,  470;  proof  of  in 
court,  471;  Exclusion  of,  324 

Physical  Condition  of  Writer,  if 
unusual,  should  be  known, 
216. 

Pictorial  Effect,  elements  of, 
212;  see  "general  appear- 
ance." 

Pierce,  Prof.  Benjamin,  277,  285, 
293. 

Pin  Holes  to  be  observed,  8. 
Postmarks,    see    Envelopes. 

Postscripts  may  be  fraudulent, 
434. 

Preliminary  Examination,  7,  15, 
16,  243,  268,  304,  341. 

Probability,  calculus  of,  227-235; 
Professor  Newcomb's  law, 
228;  of  handwriting  identity, 
230,  231,  235;  in  Sylvia  Ann 
Howland  case,  277. 

Projection    Lantern,    57. 

Proof  of  Handwriting,  how 
made,  7;  often  a  farce,  16; 
how  positive,  211. 

Proportion  of  Writing,  may  be 
important  characteristic,  147; 
in  different  systems,  148,  173, 
177;  may  show  identity,  215; 
one  cause  of  variation,  218. 

Protractor,  use  of,  101;  illustra- 
tion of,  150. 


498 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Psychology  of  Writing,  106,  143, 
201,  205,  234,  239,  240,  258, 
323. 

Punctuation,  in  holograph  forg- 
ery, 254. 

Pye,  Frank,  case,  297. 

Questioned  Writing,  may  be 
recognized  at  once  as  fraudu- 
lent, 18;  in  pencil,  22;  date 
may  show  it  is  fraudulent, 
24;  see  Writing;  case  in 
court,  466. 

Quill  Pen  Writing,  characteris- 
tics of,  161. 

"Raised"  Checks,  etc.,  9,  46,  407; 
see  Erasures,  Alterations. 

Reasons,  the  essential  part  of 
expert  testimony,  30,  36,  70, 
89,  209;  Twistleton  on,  211; 
for  identity,  215,  227;  always 
important,  242;  Mr.  Justice 
Ward  on  giving,  258;  Profes- 
sor Wigmore  on,  259;  legal 
opinions  on,  467;  illustra- 
tions, the  best,  474. 

Request  Writings,  24;  sugges- 
tions regarding,  25. 

Retouched  Writing,  how  to  show, 
47,  57;  how  to  examine,  273; 
evidence  of  fraud,  120,  136, 
245,  254;  in  pencil  written 
document,  165;  in  traced 
forgery,  270;  discussion  of, 
270-272. 

Reversed  Photographs,   67. 

Rice-Patrick  case,  111;  opinion 
in,  274;  illustrations,  30,  298, 
299. 

Rood,  on  color,  360. 

Round  Hand,  spacing  of,  150; 
slant  of,  151;  the  early 
American  hand,  171;  ex- 
amples of,  185,  186. 

Russell  case,  Boston,  393. 
Scars,    see    Marks. 
Scientific  Comparison,  260. 
Schneickert,  Dr.  Hans,   336. 


Scientific  Method,  excludes  in- 
tuition, 213;  in  examining 
writing,  241;  starts  with  no 
presumption,  255. 

Schooley-Crawford  case,  290. 
Scott,    Henry    T.,    435. 
Scott  &  Davey,   194. 

Seal,  how  to  photograph,  48,  65; 
illustration,  50,  66. 

Self-consciousness,  in  forgery, 
118,  120,  140,  202,  237;  lack 
of  shows  genuineness,  119; 
shown  by  pen  pressure,  133; 
in  pencil  forgery,  165;  atten- 
tion to  details,  202;  affects 
genuine  writing,  204;  affects 
all  effort,  205;  limits  skill, 
237,  239;  see  Anxiety. 

Sequence  of  Writing,  see  Crossed 
Lines. 

Sex,  shown  by  "angular  system," 
185;  in  anonymous  letters, 
306,  315,  316. 

Shading,  not  same  in  pencil 
writing,  22;  location  of  shows 
pen  position,  128,  242;  dis- 
tinguished from  pen  pres- 
sure, 134;  variations  of,  134- 
140;  attempts  to  explain  lack 
of,  136;  may  point  to  forg- 
ery, 136;  lateral  shading  on 
forgery,  137;  requires  much 
skill,  139;  in  different  sys- 
tems, 173,  177;  one  variation, 
218. 

Shakespeare  Forgery,  192,  194, 
373;  the  Shakespeare  system, 
193. 

Shattuck,  George  H.,  191. 
Shearman,  J.  Frank,  292,  420. 

Signatures,  disputed,  5,  7;  one 
may  not  be  adequate  stand- 
ard, 19;  formal  and  informal, 
20;  to  documents  of  varying 
importance,  20;  and  other 
writing,  20;  bearing  on  proof 
of  other  writing,  20;  forged 
documents  over  genuine,  405, 
426;  movements  in  should  be 
counted,  116;  showing  tremor 


INDEX 


499 


of  age,  119;  may  be  unusual 
and  genuine,  213. 

Simulated  Writing,  definition,  7, 
12,  136,  236;  movement  of, 
115;  illustration  of,  260. 

Simulated  Forgery,  of  signature, 
7. 

Size  of  Writing,  a  characteristic, 
145,  146,  147,  in  old  style 
hand,  177;  one  variation,  218. 

Skill  in  Writing,  great  variety  in, 
105,  109;  an  important  char- 
acteristic, 110,  111,  133;  too 
much  may  show  forgery,  116; 
one  cause  of  variation,  218; 
in  anonymous  letters,  305. 

Slant,  cause  of,  108;  a  fixed 
habit,  151;  peculiarities  of, 
152,  153,  173;  changes  ap- 
pearance, 201. 

Slant,  significance  of,  214; 
change  of,  a  favorite  dis- 
guise, 311. 

Smith,  W.  Anderson,  192. 

Spacing,  of  writing,  149;  in  dif- 
ferent systems,  150,  173. 

Speech,  and  writing  compared, 
197. 

Speed,  in  writing,  110;  shown  by 
strokes,  113,  242;  changes  in, 
in  forgery,  117;  in  genuine 
signatures,  119;  slow  in 
"vertical,"  181. 

Spelling,  in  holograph  forgery, 
254;  in  anonymous  letters, 
307. 

"Spencerian,"  proportions  of, 
148;  spacing  of,  150;  an 
American  hand,  172-177; 
some  features  of,  185. 

Standards  of  Comparison,  16-35; 
seeking  out,  one  of  first  steps, 
16;  in  some  states  not  admit- 
ted, 16;  best,  18,  20;  date  of 
may  be  important,  18,  20,  23; 
number  necessary,  19;  of  dif- 
ferent classes,  21;  for  pencil 


writing,  22,  23;  instructions 
regarding  "request"  writing, 
25;  bank  standards  frequent- 
ly inadequate,  19,  26,  28: 
forged  or  changed  standards, 
26,  27;  necessity  for,  435. 

Standard  Dictionary,  345,  359. 

Standard  Writing,  only  that  to 
be  used  that  can  be  proved, 
7;  often  inadequate,  304;  in 
anonymous  letter  cases,  321; 
adequate  amount  to  be  sup- 
plied, 19,  208;  how  much 
necessary,  19;  always  to  be 
sought,  436. 

Stealth,  a  condition  of  forgery, 
236. 

Stenographer,  not  to  deface  dis- 
puted paper,  5. 

Stenographic  Record,  sugges- 
tions regarding,  472. 

Stephen's  ink,  338. 

Stereoscopic  Illustrations,  47,  48, 
50;  how  made,  49;  law  refer- 
ence, 49;  in  writing  over  folds 
in  paper  questions,  399; 
duplicates  in  envelope  at  end 
of  book. 

Stereoscopic  Microscope,  illus- 
trated, 86;  use  in  pencil  forg- 
ery, 166;  in  crossed  strokes 
inquiries,  389. 

Stub,  of  check  book,  matched 
perforations  of  check  and 
stub,  366. 

Stub  Pen,  writing  of,  130,  156, 
200. 

Subject  Matter,  in  holograph 
forgery,  254;  to  show  age, 
432;  see  Idioms,  Spelling, 
Use  of  Capitals. 

Suicide  letters,   326. 
Superimposing,    in    traced    forg- 
ery inquiries,  288. 

Systematic  Procedure,  always 
desirable,  15,  125,  213,  243, 
246,  253;  in  examining  al- 
leged old  writing,  435. 


500 


QUESTIONED  DOCUMENTS 


Systems  of  Writing,  and  holo- 
graph documents,  9,  168; 
alone  do  not  identify,  214. 

System  of  Writing,  should  be 
known,  168,  214;  do  not  pro- 
duce identity,  230;  traces  re- 
main, 208;  divergences  from, 
210;  effect  of  foreign,  196; 
puts  impress  on  writer,  231; 
shown  by  forms,  242. 

Telegraphers'  Writing,  144,  184. 

Terminals,  show  speed,  115;  im- 
portance of,  118. 

Tests  of  Handwriting  testimony, 
27;  unfair  tests,  29,  237. 

Torn  Paper,  matching  of,  368. 

Traced  Forgery,  of  signature,  7; 
shown  by  identity,  18;  illus- 
.trations  of,  102;  definition  of, 
136,  266;  varying  pressure 
on,  134;  too  much  alike,  198, 
245,  274;  mathematical  cal- 
culations regarding,  235;  not 
usually  well  done,  266;  move- 
ment chief  defect  of,  267, 
268;  main  defects  in,  268; 
legal  opinions  on,  274-276; 
not  identical  with  model,  278; 
how  to  illustrate,  279,  285; 
position  on  document  sus- 
picious, 281. 

Tracing  Process,  evidence  of, 
273;  in  "Day  vs.  Cole,"  274; 
inherent  evidence  of  fraud, 
278. 

Transmitted  Light,  photographs 
by,  45,  46,  61,  67;  examina- 
tion by,  406. 

Tremor,  natural,  113,  120;  of 
fraud,  111,  114,  115,  116,  117; 
of  age,  118,  119,  120;  shown 
by  pen  pressure,  133. 

Twistleton,  Hon.  Edward,  35, 
211,  260. 

Type  Printing  to  show  date,  10. 

Typewriting,  disputed  documents 
in,  6;  shown  by  photographs, 
48,  57;  illustration,  58;  ex- 
amined by  microscope,  77; 


instruments  for  examination 
of,  101;  may  show  age  of 
document,  433;  questioned, 
437;  the  various  questions 
about,  439;  changes  in  type 
of,  441;  shows  its  own  his- 
tory, 442;  identifying  work 
of  particular  machine,  444; 
Wisconsin  cases,  441,  445; 
letter  designs,  466;  deteriora- 
tion produces  individuality 
and  has  date  value,  447;  the 
five  "individualities"  of  type 
impression,  448;  alignment 
illustrations,  450;  slant,  451; 
uniformity  of  impression, 
452;  defects,  453;  principles 
of  identification,  453;  type- 
writing cases,  454;  illustra- 
tions, 456-465. 

Unconsciousness  of  Writing 
habits,  141,  144,  196,  201, 
207;  of  angularity  or  round- 
ness, 226;  in  general,  239. 

Undisguised  Writing,  identified 
by  "general  appearance,"  212. 

United  States  dated  watermarks, 
371. 

Uniformity  of  Writing,  varies 
with  different  writers,  281. 

Uttering,  proof  of,  14. 
Van  Deventer  case,  262. 

Variation  in  Genuine  Writing, 
20,  196;  through  age  and 
conditions,  21;  causes  of,  199, 
200,  204;  lack  of  in  complete 
forged  documents,  203;  in 
holograph  documents,  9,  253; 
begins  from  beginning,  231; 
due  to  age,  22;  slight,  inevi- 
table, 275;  may  show  age  of 
document,  433. 

Variety  of  Forms,  vast  number, 
217;  how  produced,  218;  with 
different  writers,  214;  of  cer- 
tain letters,  215;  illustrations 
of,  221-225. 

Vertical  Writing,  movement  in, 
106;  proportions  of,  148; 
spacing  of,  150;  beginning  of, 
173;  characteristics,  180,  181, 


INDEX 


501 


182;       questions       regarding, 
192;    failure,   of,   182. 

Vernier,  illustration  and  descrip- 
tion, 99. 

"W'date  value  of  form  of,   190. 

Watermark,  to  be  looked  for,  8; 
shown  by  photographs,  45; 
imperfect  specimen,  369;  how 
produced,  370;  dated,  46,  370, 
371;  earliest  English,  372. 

Weight  of  Evidence,  difference 
in,  7,  14;  depends  on  number 
and  character  of  parts,  227; 
sometimes  weak,  241;  in- 
creased by  reasons,  260;  al- 
ways to  be  considered,  322. 

Whitman,  Alonzo  J.,  case,  324, 
325,  419. 

Whitney,  W.   R.,   374. 


Wigmore,  Professor  John  H.,  17, 
33,  41,  259,  404. 

Wills,  often  forged,  7;  careless 
practices  regarding,  422. 

Women,  writing  of,  see  Sex. 
Woodman,    A.    G.,    374. 

Writing,  characteristics  of,  7, 
12;  persistence  of,  21;  classi- 
fied, 28,  196;  defined,  105, 
209;  vary  in  significance, 
105,  322;  pen  pressure  an 
important,  132;  shading, 
134-140;  how  produced,  141; 
in  various  systems,  173;  sig- 
nificance of,  190,  197,  217, 
322;  variation  of,  196;  in- 
dividual and  general,  206, 
304;  significance  of,  vital 
problem,  209,  210;  inevitable 
and  not  sought  for,  218. 


\\ 


..  // 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


»      3Jun'63WS 

R^C'D  l_D 

MAY  2  9  TSW 

BSOJun^WD 

V 

r-%»—  ^..^ 

KEC'D  LD 

fill   ^     »j-i  * 

JULj    '64-12M 

Ai,     n  -, 

*V*T*1  1973 

grrT^"^:   rv:        -  •  -•  <"    ''• 
Rdw  U  L.L/ 

4  ^°    TDM        ^ 

- 

! 

LD  21A-50m-12,'60 
(B6221slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


. 


V-»   I  TV 


,       i2 


ES 


3MOH 


': 


• 


